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

Comparison Overview

JHA - Banno Web SolutionsJHA - Banno Web Solutions
VS
CIMBCIMB
JHA - Banno Web Solutions

JHA - Banno Web Solutions

663 W Hwy 60, Monett, 417-235-6652, US

Last Update: 18/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://banno.com/websites/
755/1000Fair

Jack Henry & Associates' Web Solutions team provides highly specialized website design with an engaging, intuitive user experience, a user-friendly content management system, secure and competitively-distinct hosting, digital governance, and security solutions exclusive...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
CIMB

CIMB

Menara CIMB, Kuala Lumpur Sentral, Kuala Lumpur, 50470, MY

Last Update: 08/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.cimb.com
785/1000Fair

CIMB Group is a leading ASEAN universal bank, one of the largest Asian investment banks and one of the world's largest Islamic banks. We are headquartered in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and offer consumer banking, commercial banking, wholesale banking, Islamic banking, and ...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:13,906
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
JHA - Banno Web Solutions

JHA - Banno Web Solutions

-
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

CIMB

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for JHA - Banno Web Solutions in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CIMB in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - JHA - Banno Web Solutions (X = Date, Y = Severity)

JHA - Banno Web Solutions cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

CIMB 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...
JHA - Banno Web Solutions

JHA - Banno Web Solutions

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
CIMB

CIMB

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-103761
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a memory exhaustion vulnerability in TransferMetadata::receivePeerNotify that allows unauthenticated attackers to grow process memory without limit. Attackers can repeatedly send notify frames up to 1 MB to the handshake RPC port, filling the uncapped notifys vector until the out-of-memory killer terminates the engine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
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:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-103760
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a denial of service vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to block the handshake daemon by never reading replies. Attackers can send a Metadata request to the handshake RPC port and stall SocketHandShakePlugin's single listener thread in writeFully(), breaking all subsequent handshakes, metadata fetches, notify and probe requests.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2025-71427
SUMMARY

Office-PowerPoint-MCP-Server through 2.0.7 contains a path traversal vulnerability that allows MCP callers to write and read files outside the working directory by supplying absolute paths or ../ sequences. Attackers can steer an AI agent via prompt injection to abuse save_presentation, open_presentation, or manage_image output_path to overwrite any server-writable file or load external files.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86344
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in 389-ds-base. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a complete LDAP operation followed by the first bytes of an incomplete LDAPMessage on the same connection, causing the server to hand that connection to a second worker thread before the first worker's result is flushed. The second worker blocks until nsslapd-ioblocktimeout while holding the connection mutex, preventing delivery of the completed operation's result. Repeating this across a small number of connections proportional to the configured worker-thread pool size exhausts the entire pool under default configuration, denying service to all clients (anonymous and authenticated, plaintext and TLS) for as long as the attacker maintains the connections.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
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:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-71454
SUMMARY

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') vulnerability in CWE-79 - Cross-site Scripting CAPEC-63 allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). This issue affects CAPEC-63: before 3.0b63.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA