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

Comparison Overview

Kelley Drye & Warren LLPKelley Drye & Warren LLP
VS
DLA PiperDLA Piper
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

175 Greenwich St, New York, 10007, US

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.kelleydrye.com
708/1000Moderate

Kelley Drye is an AmLaw 200 law firm of more than 350 lawyers and other professionals practicing in New York, NY; Washington, D.C.; Chicago, IL; Houston, TX, Los Angeles, CA; San Francisco, CA; San Diego, CA; New Jersey; and Stamford, CT. A powerhouse firm with the he...

NAICS:54111
NAICS Definition:Offices of Lawyers
Employees:708
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
DLA Piper

DLA Piper

Global, GB

Last Update: 08/10/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.dlapiper.com
783/1000Fair

DLA Piper is a global law firm helping our clients achieve their goals wherever they do business. Our pursuit of innovation has transformed our delivery of legal services. With offices in the Americas, Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Asia Pacific, we deliver excepti...

NAICS:54111
NAICS Definition:Offices of Lawyers
Employees:13,425
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

-
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
DLA Piper

DLA Piper

-
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 Law Practice Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Kelley Drye & Warren LLP in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Law Practice Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for DLA Piper in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Kelley Drye & Warren LLP (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - DLA Piper (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DLA Piper 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...
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
KEL024090625
DLA Piper

DLA Piper

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-22061
SUMMARY

Trident versions v25.02.1 through v26.06.1 are susceptible to a vulnerability that could allow an authenticated attacker with access to debug logs to view LUKS passphrases or SMB Active Directory credentials.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-108269
SUMMARY

Remote Attestation TLS Clients provides multi-language utilities for verifying attested TLS connections. Prior to 0.5.0, the Rust and Go RA-TLS challenge verifiers accepted quote ReportData that was bound to the certificate public key and client nonce but not to the active TLS session before permitting application traffic. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing the clients to accept an attacker-terminated connection as the attested enclave. This issue is fixed in 0.5.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-108268
SUMMARY

Enclave OS Virtual runs container workloads inside confidential virtual machines with end-to-end attestation. Prior to tdx-v0.2.43 and tdx-gpu-v0.6.27, the TDX/GPU RA-TLS certificate issuer placed the certificate public-key hash and client nonce in quote ReportData but omitted a value bound to the active TLS session. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing a relying party to accept an attacker-terminated connection as the attested enclave. This issue is fixed in tdx-v0.2.43 and tdx-gpu-v0.6.27.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-108267
SUMMARY

Privasys Go is a maintained fork of the Go programming language that adds RA-TLS support to crypto/tls. Prior to privasys-v0.5.1-go1.26.5, challenge-mode RA-TLS certificates bound quote ReportData to the certificate public key and client nonce but not to the active TLS session. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing a relying party to accept a handshake terminated by the attacker as an attested enclave connection. This issue is fixed in privasys-v0.5.1-go1.26.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-92705
SUMMARY

Aegisub is a cross-platform advanced subtitle editor. From 3.2.0 to 3.4.2, Aegisub automatically loads Automation scripts referenced by `Automation Scripts` metadata in `ASS` subtitle projects without asking whether the user trusts the scripts or their authors. An attacker can distribute a crafted `ASS` file together with a referenced malicious Automation script, and opening the `AS`  file executes arbitrary code with the privileges of the Aegisub process. From 3.4.0 to 3.4.2, inconsistent handling of embedded `NUL` characters between extension validation and filesystem operations additionally allows a crafted `ASS/Lua` polyglot to reference and execute itself as a single-file variant. The vulnerability is fixed in Aegisub 3.5.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8