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

Comparison Overview

HCLTech Sri LankaHCLTech Sri Lanka
VS
Infosys BPMInfosys BPM
HCLTech Sri Lanka

HCLTech Sri Lanka

"Alnitak Building", Orion city - IT Park, Colombo , 00900, LK

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
760/1000Fair

HCLTech is a global technology company, home to more than 223,000 people across 60 countries, delivering industry-leading capabilities centered around digital, engineering, cloud and AI, powered by a broad portfolio of technology services and products. We work with clie...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:1,090
Subsidiaries:28
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Infosys BPM

Infosys BPM

Infosys BPM Limited, Plot no 26/3, 26/4, 26/6, Hosur Road, Electronics City, Bengaluru, 560100, IN

Last Update: 09/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.infosysbpm.com
814/1000Good

Infosys BPM Ltd., the business process management subsidiary of Infosys Ltd. (NYSE: INFY), was set up in April 2002. Infosys BPM focuses on integrated end-to-end outsourcing and delivers transformational benefits to its clients through reduced costs, ongoing productivit...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:43,598
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
HCLTech Sri Lanka

HCLTech Sri Lanka

-
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
Infosys BPM

Infosys BPM

-
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 IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for HCLTech Sri Lanka in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Infosys BPM in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - HCLTech Sri Lanka (X = Date, Y = Severity)

HCLTech Sri Lanka cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Infosys BPM (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Infosys BPM 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...
HCLTech Sri Lanka

HCLTech Sri Lanka

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Infosys BPM

Infosys BPM

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-105761
SUMMARY

Dify is an open-source LLM app development platform. Prior to 1.16.0, the PUT /console/api/apps/<app_id>/server endpoint in api/controllers/console/app/mcp_server.py used AppMCPServerController.put() to retrieve an AppMCPServer by the client-supplied server ID without verifying that the server belonged to the requested application and tenant. An authenticated workspace member could therefore change another application's MCP server status and parameters, potentially redirecting data or disabling the service. This issue is fixed in version 1.16.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-105760
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, a caller can use the request-level media_io_kwargs field to select the GLMGA video backend and supply large values for the fps and max_frames options without a strict work ceiling. GLMGA constructs and deduplicates an attacker-sized pre-decode frame-index list, allowing a compact request and tiny valid video to consume disproportionate CPU time and memory in the shared media-loading executor. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105759
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, the Rust frontend's track_http_metrics middleware records the raw HTTP method token as a Prometheus label for requests reaching registered routes. An unauthenticated attacker can send unique arbitrary method tokens to unguarded routes such as /tokenize, causing Prometheus's Family::get_or_create function to permanently create counter and histogram label sets. Those label sets increase process memory usage and enlarge the /metrics response until the service or monitoring path is exhausted. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-105758
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. From 0.24.0 until 0.30.0, the Qwen2VLVideoBackend and Qwen3VLVideoBackend classes accept request-level values for the media_io_kwargs.video.max_frames and media_io_kwargs.video.fps fields without enforcing server-side ceilings. An unauthenticated caller can submit these values to the /tokenize endpoint, causing the sampler to decode every frame selected from attacker-controlled video input, consume disproportionate frontend memory, and potentially terminate the API process before scheduling or admission control. The Rust frontend is not affected because it rejects the media_io_kwargs field. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105757
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, structured-output request failures can escape request-scoped validation and reach the EngineCore fatal-error path. A per-request backend mismatch can re-raise a grammar compilation exception, padding produced by the ngram_gpu speculative-decoding mode can pass a negative token to guidance validation, and the Rust frontend can admit empty structured-output values that the Python frontend rejects, allowing ordinary constrained-generation requests to terminate the shared engine. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8