Comparison Overview
GuidePoint Security

GuidePoint Security
1900 Reston Metro Plaza, Suite 701, Reston, Virginia, US, 20190
Last Update: 19/08/2026
GuidePoint Security provides trusted cybersecurity expertise, solutions, and services that help organizations make informed decisions and minimize risk. Our experts act as your trusted advisor to understand your business and challenges, helping you through an evaluation...

GFT Technologies
Schelmenwasenstr. 34, Stuttgart, 70567, DE
Last Update: 01/04/2026
GFT Technologies is an AI-centric global digital transformation company. We design advanced data and AI transformation solutions, modernize technology architectures and develop next-generation core systems for industry leaders in Banking, Insurance, Manufacturing and Ro...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

GuidePoint Security







GFT Technologies






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)
GuidePoint Security has 35.14% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for GFT Technologies in 2026.
Incident History - GuidePoint Security (X = Date, Y = Severity)
GuidePoint Security cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - GFT Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)
GFT Technologies cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

GuidePoint Security

GFT Technologies
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
MOOS-IvP through 24.8.1 fails to properly validate variable names extracted from alog files in the SplitHandler, allowing attackers to write files outside the split directory. Attackers can supply crafted alog files with backslash sequences in variable names to escape the output directory and append to arbitrary files on Windows systems.
- https://github.com/moos-ivp/moos-ivp
- https://github.com/moos-ivp/moos-ivp/blob/1de9ae146cd63c209e8c3fd81611a4ed2472971b/ivp/src/lib_logutils/SplitHandler.cpp#L189
- https://github.com/moos-ivp/moos-ivp/commit/6f0619e905b325d6b88f76425673045c6e4f6f94
- https://github.com/moos-ivp/moos-ivp/pull/137
- https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/moos-ivp-through-24.8.1-alog-splitting-path-traversal-on-windows
MOOS core-moos through 10.4.0 contains a buffer over-read vulnerability in CMOOSCommPkt where a four-byte packet triggers out-of-bounds memory access during deserialization. Attackers can open a TCP connection to the MOOSDB port and send a crafted short packet to read memory before authentication.
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/blob/ec9c77c68fcbdef8f5e4c60fe243acd223433f0c/Core/libMOOS/Comms/MOOSCommPkt.cpp#L228
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/commit/d30c14585753f9ae39749d9628ed15c8383f0568
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/pull/75
- https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/moos-core-moos-through-10.4.0-moosdb-out-of-bounds-read-via-short-packet
MOOS core-moos through 10.4.0 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability in CMOOSSerialPort::GetTelegram() that writes a NUL terminator one byte past the serial telegram stack buffer. Attackers controlling the serial line can send a full-length telegram to trigger the off-by-one write, corrupting the stack and potentially enabling code execution.
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/blob/ec9c77c68fcbdef8f5e4c60fe243acd223433f0c/Core/libMOOS/Utils/MOOSSerialPort.cpp#L595
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/commit/befb04df2039d0080715ea35f56268092db4ec0f
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/pull/73
- https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/moos-core-moos-through-10.4.0-off-by-one-buffer-overflow-in-serial-telegram-handling
MOOS core-moos through 10.4.0 fails to escape database contents when rendering MOOSDB HTTP pages, allowing attackers to inject malicious scripts. Any MOOS publisher can set variable values containing script payloads that execute in the browser of operators viewing the web interface.
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/blob/ec9c77c68fcbdef8f5e4c60fe243acd223433f0c/Core/libMOOS/DB/HTTPConnection.cpp#L460
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/commit/a3f26f099bb08decb143f704d8b1ca16ae405b44
- https://github.com/themoos/core-moos/pull/78
- https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/moos-core-moos-through-10.4.0-moosdb-http-pages-stored-cross-site-scripting
MOOS ui-moos through 50b9c6c contains a buffer overflow vulnerability in ScopeTabPane.cpp and ScopeGrid.cpp where client and variable names are formatted into fixed 1024-byte buffers using sprintf without length validation. Attackers can supply arbitrarily long MOOS identifiers that overflow the buffers when an operator selects process list entries or pokes variables, enabling code execution.
- https://github.com/themoos/ui-moos
- https://github.com/themoos/ui-moos/blob/50b9c6c65169c501f746cfef1e167f74a7735e74/Tools/Graphical/uMS/ScopeTabPane.cpp#L243
- https://github.com/themoos/ui-moos/commit/a6ebc0bc6cb360315ce620e865f996d189cddb0e
- https://github.com/themoos/ui-moos/pull/5
- https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/moos-ui-moos-through-50b9c6c-ums-buffer-overflow-via-long-moos-identifiers