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

Comparison Overview

I&M Bank LtdI&M Bank Ltd
VS
CIMB NiagaCIMB Niaga
I&M Bank Ltd

I&M Bank Ltd

1st Parklands, Nairobi, 30238, KE

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.imbankgroup.com
764/1000Fair

I&M Bank is a wholly owned subsidiary of I&M Group PLC, a publicly quoted company at the Nairobi Securities Exchange (NSE). The bank possesses a rich heritage in banking. Started in 1974, it evolved from a community financial institution to a publicly listed major reg...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:1,936
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
CIMB Niaga

CIMB Niaga

Graha CIMB Niaga, Jakarta, 12190, ID

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.cimbniaga.co.id
785/1000Fair

CIMB Niaga was established as Bank Niaga in 1955. CIMB Group holds around 97.9% of the stakes in CIMB Niaga (including PT Commerce Kapital 1.02%). The Bank offers a comprehensive suite of both conventional and Islamic banking products and services, through an expanding ...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:14,620
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
I&M Bank Ltd

I&M Bank Ltd

-
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
CIMB Niaga

CIMB Niaga

-
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 Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for I&M Bank Ltd in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CIMB Niaga in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - I&M Bank Ltd (X = Date, Y = Severity)

I&M Bank Ltd cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - CIMB Niaga (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CIMB Niaga cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
I&M Bank Ltd

I&M Bank Ltd

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
CIMB Niaga

CIMB Niaga

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16197
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. The affected element is the function handleMessageReceive of the file pkg/channels/feishu/feishu_64.go of the component Group Message Handler. Such manipulation leads to missing authorization. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16196
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. Impacted is the function isPrivateOrRestrictedIP of the file pkg/tools/integration/web.go of the component web_fetch. This manipulation causes server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. Patch name: 2efbe5d560e7ed9bc5209c203dc4aa6ecdbc7405. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16195
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. This issue affects the function dispatchIncoming of the file pkg/channels/wecom/wecom.go of the component Group Message Handler. The manipulation results in incorrect authorization. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-10130
SUMMARY

QueryWeaver contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to obtain valid session tokens for existing accounts by submitting a signup request with a known victim email address. The signup route unconditionally creates and links a new token to the matching Identity via a Cypher MERGE operation before checking whether the email belongs to an existing account, causing the server to return a valid authenticated session token for the victim's identity without requiring any prior credentials or user interaction.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-16194
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in zhayujie CowAgent up to 2.1.1. This affects the function WebFetch.execute of the file agent/tools/web_fetch/web_fetch.py. Executing a manipulation of the argument url can lead to server-side request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. Upgrading to version 2.1.2 is able to mitigate this issue. This patch is called ea47f3097eed4f8295c4cb3d76ecb97e0f43d632. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component. The vendor was contacted early, responded in a very professional manner and quickly released a fixed version of the affected product.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8