Comparison Overview

John Stokes Financial

VS

PING AN

John Stokes Financial

2040 Main Street, Suite 570, Irvine, 92614, US
Last Update: 2026-01-16
View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.johnstokesfinancial.com

At John Stokes Financial, we specialize in providing financial advice to individuals who are undergoing significant life and job transitions, such as job loss and retirement. We understand that these periods of change can be both exciting and challenging, and we are here to guide you every step of the way. Our goal is to help you navigate these transitions to ensure financial clarity and to never leave money on the table. Whether you are starting a new chapter, embarking on a new career path, or retiring after a successful career, our team is dedicated to helping you achieve your financial goals and secure a prosperous future. Please see my website for additional information and disclosure. Third party comments may not be representative of all customer experiences.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 11
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
View Profile

PING AN

No. 5033 Yitian Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, 518046, CN
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 800 and 849
https://group.pingan.com/

This is the official Company Page of Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd. (HKEx: 2318; SSE: 601318; ADR: PNGAY). Ping An strives to become a world leading technology-powered financial services group. We believe the way people receive financial services and healthcare in the future will be through intelligent ecosystems enabled by technology. With over 220 million retail customers and nearly 611 million Internet users, Ping An is one of the largest financial services companies in the world. Technology has enabled us to bring changes to the landscape of retail finance and healthcare in China. Supported by the Group’s strong core financials, our continued investment in fintech and healthtech resulted in increasing revenue contributions from our tech units as well as several unicorns. Ping An ranked 6th in the Forbes Global 2000 list and 16th in the Fortune Global 500 list in 2021. Follow us for latest news, events and job opportunities.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 51,286
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/john-stokes-financial.jpeg
John Stokes Financial
—
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
—
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
—
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
—
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
—
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
—
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ping-an.jpeg
PING AN
—
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
—
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
—
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
—
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
—
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
—
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
John Stokes Financial
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
PING AN
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for John Stokes Financial in 2026.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PING AN in 2026.

Incident History — John Stokes Financial (X = Date, Y = Severity)

John Stokes Financial cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — PING AN (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PING AN cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/john-stokes-financial.jpeg
John Stokes Financial
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ping-an.jpeg
PING AN
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

PING AN company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to John Stokes Financial company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

John Stokes Financial company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas PING AN company has not reported any.

In the current year, PING AN company and John Stokes Financial company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither PING AN company nor John Stokes Financial company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

John Stokes Financial company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other PING AN company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither PING AN company nor John Stokes Financial company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither John Stokes Financial company nor PING AN company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither John Stokes Financial nor PING AN holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither John Stokes Financial company nor PING AN company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

PING AN company employs more people globally than John Stokes Financial company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither John Stokes Financial nor PING AN holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither John Stokes Financial nor PING AN holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither John Stokes Financial nor PING AN holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither John Stokes Financial nor PING AN holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither John Stokes Financial nor PING AN holds HIPAA certification.

Neither John Stokes Financial nor PING AN holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper validation of specified type of input in M365 Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
References
Description

Moonraker is a Python web server providing API access to Klipper 3D printing firmware. In versions 0.9.3 and below, instances configured with the "ldap" component enabled are vulnerable to LDAP search filter injection techniques via the login endpoint. The 401 error response message can be used to determine whether or not a search was successful, allowing for brute force methods to discover LDAP entries on the server such as user IDs and user attributes. This issue has been fixed in version 0.10.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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
References
Description

Runtipi is a Docker-based, personal homeserver orchestrator that facilitates multiple services on a single server. Versions 3.7.0 and above allow an authenticated user to execute arbitrary system commands on the host server by injecting shell metacharacters into backup filenames. The BackupManager fails to sanitize the filenames of uploaded backups. The system persists user-uploaded files directly to the host filesystem using the raw originalname provided in the request. This allows an attacker to stage a file containing shell metacharacters (e.g., $(id).tar.gz) at a predictable path, which is later referenced during the restore process. The successful storage of the file is what allows the subsequent restore command to reference and execute it. This issue has been fixed in version 4.7.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References