Comparison Overview

JPMorganChase

VS

Paytm

JPMorganChase

270 Park Avenue, New York, NY, US, 10017-2014
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 750 and 799

With a history tracing its roots to 1799 in New York City, JPMorganChase is one of the world's oldest, largest, and best-known financial institutions—carrying forth the innovative spirit of our heritage firms in global operations across 100 markets. We serve millions of customers and many of the world’s most prominent corporate, institutional, and government clients daily, managing assets and investments, offering business advice and strategies, and providing innovative banking solutions and services. Social Media Terms and Conditions: https://bit.ly/JPMCSocialTerms © 2024 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved. JPMorganChase is an Equal Opportunity Employer, including Disability/Veterans.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 215,187
Subsidiaries: 12
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
10
Attack type number
2

Paytm

undefined, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, 201301, IN
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 800 and 849

Paytm started the Digital Revolution in India. And we went on to become India’s leading Payments App. Today, more than 20 Million merchants & businesses are powered by Paytm to Accept Payments digitally. This is because more than 300 million Indians use Paytm to Pay at their stores. And that’s not all, Paytm App is used to Pay bills, do Recharges, Send money to friends & family, Book movies & travel tickets. With innovations to Financial services & products in pipeline, this is but one of the milestones achieved towards our mission – to bring 500 million unserved and underserved Indians to the mainstream economy.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 24,919
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/jpmorganchase.jpeg
JPMorganChase
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/paytm-mobile-solutions-pvt-ltd-.jpeg
Paytm
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
JPMorganChase
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Paytm
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

JPMorganChase has 156.41% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Paytm in 2025.

Incident History — JPMorganChase (X = Date, Y = Severity)

JPMorganChase cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Paytm (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Paytm cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jpmorganchase.jpeg
JPMorganChase
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Legitimate software and open-source pen-testing tools
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Software Issue
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/paytm-mobile-solutions-pvt-ltd-.jpeg
Paytm
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Paytm company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to JPMorganChase company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

JPMorganChase company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Paytm company has not reported any.

In the current year, JPMorganChase company has reported more cyber incidents than Paytm company.

JPMorganChase company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Paytm company has not reported such incidents publicly.

JPMorganChase company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Paytm company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Paytm company nor JPMorganChase company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither JPMorganChase company nor Paytm company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither JPMorganChase nor Paytm holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

JPMorganChase company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Paytm company.

JPMorganChase company employs more people globally than Paytm company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither JPMorganChase nor Paytm holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither JPMorganChase nor Paytm holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither JPMorganChase nor Paytm holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither JPMorganChase nor Paytm holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither JPMorganChase nor Paytm holds HIPAA certification.

Neither JPMorganChase nor Paytm holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: 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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H