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

Comparison Overview

InfrabelInfrabel
VS
CNCN
Infrabel

Infrabel

Place Marcel Broodthaersplein, 2, Brussels, N/A, 1060, BE

Last Update: 26/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.infrabel.be/
767/1000Fair

Infrabel builds, maintains and renews the railway infrastructure in Belgium: tracks, switches, bridges, tunnels, overpasses and signals. We also coordinate and and monitor all the trains that run on our rail network. 24 hours a day 7 days a week. This means that 600,000...

NAICS:482
NAICS Definition:Rail Transportation
Employees:4,948
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
CN

CN

935 de La Gauchetière Street West, Montreal, H3B 2M9, CA

Last Update: 12/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.cn.ca
821/1000Good

CN is a North American transportation and logistics leader focused on supply chain innovation and collaboration. We offer integrated shipping solutions, including rail, intermodal, trucking, freight forwarding, warehousing and distribution. We are an engaged corporate...

NAICS:482
NAICS Definition:Rail Transportation
Employees:12,671
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Infrabel

Infrabel

-
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
CN

CN

-
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 Rail Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Infrabel in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Rail Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CN in 2026.

Incidents

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

Infrabel 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 - CN (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CN 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...
Infrabel

Infrabel

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
CN

CN

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-90461
SUMMARY

OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-90460
SUMMARY

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90457
SUMMARY

The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90456
SUMMARY

An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90455
SUMMARY

A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA