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

Comparison Overview

Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong LimitedExclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited
VS
Hexaware TechnologiesHexaware Technologies
Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited

Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited

Unit 903-5, 9/F, Millennium City 3, 370 Kwun Tong Road, Kowloon, HK

Last Update: 13/05/2026

View Profile
750/1000Fair

Exclusive Networks is a global trusted cybersecurity specialist helping to drive the transition to a totally trusted digital world for all people and organisations. Our distinctive approach to distribution gives partners more opportunity and more customer relevance. The...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:58
Subsidiaries:42
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Hexaware Technologies

Hexaware Technologies

#1, Sector III, Millennium Business Park,, Navi Mumbai, 400710, IN

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.hexaware.com
762/1000Fair

At Hexaware, we're not just a global technology and business process services company; we're a community of 31,600+ Hexawarians dedicated to one singular purpose: creating smiles through the power of great people and technology. With a presence in 58 offices across 28 c...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:34,837
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited

Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited

-
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
Hexaware Technologies

Hexaware Technologies

-
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 IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hexaware Technologies in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Hexaware Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hexaware Technologies 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...
Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited

Exclusive Networks JJNet Hong Kong Limited

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Hexaware Technologies

Hexaware Technologies

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2