Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

Grandstream NetworksGrandstream Networks
VS
VodafoneVodafone
Grandstream Networks

Grandstream Networks

126 Brookline Ave, Boston, 02215, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.grandstream.com
751/1000Fair

Grandstream has been connecting the world since 2002 with unified communications and networking solutions that make communicating more impactful than ever before. Our award-winning solutions provide everything needed to build a seamless, easy-to-manage communication pla...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:216
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Vodafone

Vodafone

1 Kingdom Street, London, W2 6BY, GB

Last Update: 17/08/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.vodafone.com/
674/1000Weak

At Vodafone, our purpose is to connect everyone. From the seabed to the stars, we provide innovative mobile and fixed connectivity solutions to empower our customers across the globe. And we're constantly expanding coverage to bridge continents and spread inclusion, eve...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:156,565
Subsidiaries:18
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
6
Attack type number
4

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Grandstream Networks

Grandstream Networks

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Vodafone

Vodafone

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

Grandstream Networks has 47.37% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

Vodafone has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Grandstream Networks (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Grandstream Networks cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Vodafone (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Vodafone cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Grandstream Networks

Grandstream Networks

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
GRA1771961536
Vodafone

Vodafone

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
HCLTAT1786448292
🔒 Incident : Breach
VOD93129723
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
VOD41441223

FAQ

Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Grandstream Networks company and Vodafone company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Grandstream Networks and Vodafone, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Grandstream Networks and Vodafone, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Grandstream Networks or Vodafone ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Grandstream Networks or Vodafone ?
Between Grandstream Networks and Vodafone, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Grandstream Networks and Vodafone, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66591
SUMMARY

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in David Lingren Media LIbrary Assistant allows Stored XSS. This issue affects Media LIbrary Assistant: from n/a through 3.39.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
3.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-66589
SUMMARY

Missing Authorization vulnerability in Kings Plugins B2BKing allows Exploiting Incorrectly Configured Access Control Security Levels. This issue affects B2BKing: from n/a through 5.2.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-27365
SUMMARY

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in PublishPress PublishPress Series allows Stored XSS. This issue affects PublishPress Series: from n/a through 2.17.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
3.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.7
CVE-2026-73974
SUMMARY

linuxfabrik-lib provides Python modules for database access, caching, shell execution, and API integrations, and Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins uses its shared testing helper across check plugins. Prior to linuxfabrik-lib 6.1.0 and Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins 7.0.0, lib.lftest.test() treated the first or second element of a --test CSV argument as a filesystem path and returned the file contents as simulated standard output or standard error without path confinement. The hidden but production-accessible --test argument was accepted by sudo-authorized plugins, so an attacker controlling the nagios or icinga account could use check-plugins/deb-updates/deb-updates with its default QUERY=1 to disclose every line of a root-readable file. Approximately 22 other plugins exposed filtered content or a root file existence and readability oracle through the same helper, while check-plugins/network-bonding/network-bonding and check-plugins/openstack-swift-stat/openstack-swift-stat had direct read paths that bypassed the helper. The library fix confines fixture reads to the invoking plugin's unit-test directory and refuses unsafe anchors, and the plugin fix routes the two bypasses through that helper. These issues are fixed in linuxfabrik-lib 6.1.0 and Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins 7.0.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-73973
SUMMARY

Linuxfabrik Monitoring Plugins provides monitoring plugins for Icinga, Nagios, and related systems. Prior to version 7.0.0, check-plugins/logfile/logfile accepted a free-form --filename path and opened it as root when invoked through the shipped nagios or icinga sudoers allowlist, without confining the resolved path to /var/log. An attacker who controls the monitoring account can select a root-readable file such as /etc/shadow and use --warning-regex . while leaving SUPPRESS_OUTPUT false, causing each nonempty line to be collected in warn_matches and returned through lib.base.oao(). The vulnerable flow passes the expanded scan_path directly to open(), and neither real-path containment nor an allowlist protects the sink. The same fix also confines mysql-logfile and openvpn-client-list paths, allows only documented log roots, and resolves symlinks and parent-directory traversal before checking containment. This issue is fixed in version 7.0.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-18
UPDATED
Date2026-08-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8