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

Comparison Overview

Kames CapitalKames Capital
VS
OdebrechtOdebrecht
Kames Capital

Kames Capital

N/A

Last Update: 26/10/2025

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.aegonam.com
746/1000Moderate

Aegon Asset Management – Investing Beyond Borders. We are active global investors. Our 380 investment professionals manage and advise on assets of USD 408 billion (as of June 30, 2020). We organize our capabilities around four global investment platforms where we ha...

NAICS:5239
NAICS Definition:Other Financial Investment Activities
Employees:71
Subsidiaries:23
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Odebrecht

Odebrecht

Av. Luís Viana, 2841, Salvador, 41730-900, BR

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.novonor.com.br/
783/1000Fair

Founded in 1944, Odebrecht is a Brazilian group with diverse businesses and world-class standards of quality. Its Members, guided by the Group’s own philosophy, the Odebrecht Entrepreneurial Technology (TEO), provide services and manufacture products for clients on fiv...

NAICS:5239
NAICS Definition:Other Financial Investment Activities
Employees:14,112
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Kames Capital

Kames Capital

-
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
Odebrecht

Odebrecht

-
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 Investment Management Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Kames Capital in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Investment Management Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Odebrecht in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Kames Capital (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Kames Capital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Odebrecht 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...
Kames Capital

Kames Capital

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Odebrecht

Odebrecht

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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