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

Comparison Overview

HaaretzHaaretz
VS
NikkeiNikkei
Haaretz

Haaretz

21 Schocken Street, Tel Aviv, 61350, IL

Last Update: 16/08/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.haaretz.co.il
737/1000Moderate

Haaretz is Israel's leading daily newspaper and the oldest daily in Hebrew. It is generally considered one of the most respected newspapers in the world. Founded in British Palestine in 1918, Haaretz grew to become the most influential newspaper in Israel under the ...

NAICS:51111
NAICS Definition:Newspaper Publishers
Employees:532
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Nikkei

Nikkei

1-3-7 OTEMACHI,CHIYODA-KU, Tokyo, 100-8066, JP

Last Update: 06/09/2026

View Profile
537/1000Critical

Nikkei is a world-renowned media brand for Asian news, respected for quality journalism and for being a trusted provider of business news and information. Founded as a market news provider in Japan in 1876, Nikkei has grown into one of the world’s largest media corpor...

NAICS:51111
NAICS Definition:Newspaper Publishers
Employees:10,695
Subsidiaries:33
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
6
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Haaretz

Haaretz

-
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
Nikkei

Nikkei

-
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 Newspaper Publishing Industry Avg (This Year)

Haaretz has 60.0% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Newspaper Publishing Industry Avg (This Year)

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

Incidents

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

Haaretz cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Nikkei 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...
Haaretz

Haaretz

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
HAAISR1786883093
Nikkei

Nikkei

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
WORNOTGOOZOONIKTIN1777868873
🔒 Incident : Breach
NIK31101431110425
🔒 Incident : Breach
NIK1702217110725

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8