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

Comparison Overview

ING PolandING Poland
VS
BBVABBVA
ING Poland

ING Poland

Sokolska 34, Katowice, PL, 40-086

Last Update: 28/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.ing.pl
788/1000Fair

The website belongs to ING Bank Śląski S.A. with its registered office in Katowice, postal code: 40-086, at ul. Sokolska 34. Information clause (pdf): https://www.ing.pl/klauzula. ING Bank Slaski from ING Group is one of the biggest banks in Poland. We provide integrat...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:3,817
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
BBVA

BBVA

Plaza de San Nicolas 4, Bilbao, 48005, ES

Last Update: 04/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.bbva.com
830/1000Good

At BBVA we are leading the transformation of banking worldwide, united in pursuing our goal of bringing the age of opportunity to everyone. Firmly focused on the future, our on-going digital transformation is already producing disruptive innovations that power our visio...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:129,632
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ING Poland

ING Poland

-
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
BBVA

BBVA

-
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 ING Poland in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BBVA in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - ING Poland (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ING Poland 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 - BBVA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BBVA 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...
ING Poland

ING Poland

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
BBVA

BBVA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-95828
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in Mstfakts College-Management-System. This affects the function session_start of the file Front-end/server.php of the component Authentication. Executing a manipulation can lead to session fixiation. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. This product takes the approach of rolling releases to provide continious delivery. Therefore, version details for affected and updated releases are not available. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-95820
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in anirbandutta9 College-Notes-Gallery up to 8c1cf3d98f30982d069c88ca172612c001eb39f6. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /dashboard/userprofile.php?section=admin1. Performing a manipulation of the argument image results in unrestricted upload. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. This product is using a rolling release to provide continious delivery. Therefore, no version details for affected nor updated releases are available. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
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-2026-61685
SUMMARY

ReactPress is a publishing system for React developers. Prior to version 3.7.0, ReactPress API list endpoints build TypeORM `QueryBuilder` conditions using unsanitized HTTP query parameter names as SQL column identifiers (e.g. `` `article.${key}` ``). TypeORM parameterizes values but not column names, allowing unauthenticated attackers to inject SQL through crafted query string keys. Version 3.7.0 contains a patch. As a workaround, allowlist allowed filter column names before interpolating into SQL.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-57576
SUMMARY

plone.app.dexterity is a content-type system for the Plone content management system, and plone.app.contenttypes provides Plone’s Dexterity-based content types. Plone.app.dexterity versions through 3.2.2, 4.0.0 through 4.1.2, and 5.0.0, and plone.app.contenttypes versions through 3.0.11, 4.0.0 through 4.0.9, and 5.0.0 are vulnerable to denial of service because an authenticated user can create content with excessively long titles, descriptions, or uploaded-file names, causing Plone to become unresponsive and potentially making the resulting content difficult to edit or delete. The vulnerability is patched in plone.app.dexterity versions 3.2.3, 4.1.3, and 5.0.1, and in plone.app.contenttypes versions 3.0.12, 4.0.10, and 5.0.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
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
CVE-2026-18176
SUMMARY

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-22
UPDATED
Date2026-09-22
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8