Comparison Overview

iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited)

VS

Morgan Stanley

iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited)

100 Pavillion Drive, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN4 7YP, GB
Last Update: 2025-03-05 (UTC)
Between 800 and 900

Strong

iPSL was formed in 2000 as a joint venture company between Unisys, Barclays, HSBC and Lloyds Banking Group. Since then, we have been trusted to conduct their cheque processing business, including the transition from paper clearing to the digital Image Clearing System (ICS) introduced in October 2017. We are the UK market leader in digital cheque processing through continued innovation and rigorous adherence to industry and client driven quality measures. Underpinned by custom-built technology and efficient processes across multiple channels, our 700+ colleagues deliver the shared service model to multiple banks seamlessly processing over 190m cheques to a value of over ยฃ250bn annually. iPSL offers many advantages, including a cloud-based solution to manage transactional decline and reduce physical asset footprint to better manage costs; highly secure, central UK locations for operations that are regularly audited to provide assurance and confidence of the operational activity. As an organisation we are able to pivot and adjust to impacts on business such as the COVID-19 pandemic, through which we have continued to provide services without interruption or reduction by providing a safe, socially distanced workplace and innovative use of technology and process enhancements.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 699
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Morgan Stanley

1585 Broadway, None, New York, NY, US, 10036
Last Update: 2025-08-05 (UTC)

Excellent

Between 900 and 1000

Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS) is a leading global financial services firm providing a wide range of investment banking, securities, wealth management and investment management services. With offices in 42 countries, our firm's employees serve clients worldwide including corporations, governments, institutions and individuals. We are committed to maintaining the first-class service and high standard of excellence that have always defined the firm and everything we do is guided by our five core values: Do the right thing, put clients first, lead with exceptional ideas, commit to diversity and inclusion, and give back.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 94,632
Subsidiaries: 5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ipsl.jpeg
iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited)
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/morgan-stanley.jpeg
Morgan Stanley
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited)
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Morgan Stanley
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Morgan Stanley in 2025.

Incident History โ€” iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Morgan Stanley (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Morgan Stanley cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ipsl.jpeg
iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited)
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/morgan-stanley.jpeg
Morgan Stanley
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2022
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Vishing
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 07/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Ransomware attack via third-party vendor
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 1/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Morgan Stanley company company demonstrates a stronger AI risk posture compared to iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company company, reflecting its advanced AI governance and monitoring frameworks.

Morgan Stanley company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company has not reported any.

In the current year, Morgan Stanley company and iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Morgan Stanley company nor iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Morgan Stanley company has disclosed at least one data breach, while iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Morgan Stanley company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company nor Morgan Stanley company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Morgan Stanley company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company.

Morgan Stanley company employs more people globally than iPSL (Intelligent Processing Solutions Limited) company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Formbricks is an open source qualtrics alternative. Prior to version 4.0.1, Formbricks is missing JWT signature verification. This vulnerability stems from a token validation routine that only decodes JWTs (jwt.decode) without verifying their signatures. Both the email verification token login path and the password reset server action use the same validator, which does not check the tokenโ€™s signature, expiration, issuer, or audience. If an attacker learns the victimโ€™s actual user.id, they can craft an arbitrary JWT with an alg: "none" header and use it to authenticate and reset the victimโ€™s password. This issue has been patched in version 4.0.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

Apollo Studio Embeddable Explorer & Embeddable Sandbox are website embeddable software solutions from Apollo GraphQL. Prior to Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3, a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability was identified. The vulnerability arises from missing origin validation in the client-side code that handles window.postMessage events. A malicious website can send forged messages to the embedding page, causing the victimโ€™s browser to execute arbitrary GraphQL queries or mutations against their GraphQL server while authenticated with the victimโ€™s cookies. This issue has been patched in Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /consulta-dispensas. Such manipulation leads to improper authorization. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: 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
Description

A weakness has been identified in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected is an unknown function of the file /module/Api/aluno. This manipulation of the argument aluno_id causes improper authorization. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: 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
Description

A security flaw has been discovered in Tencent WeKnora 0.1.0. This impacts the function testEmbeddingModel of the file /api/v1/initialization/embedding/test. The manipulation of the argument baseUrl results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component. The vendor responds: "We have confirmed that the issue mentioned in the report does not exist in the latest releases".

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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