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

Comparison Overview

Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.
VS
J.P. MorganJ.P. Morgan
Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.

Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.

186 Granite St, Suite E, Manchester, New Hampshire, US, 03101

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.lhainc.com/
707/1000Moderate

Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc., is a national company specializing in accounts receivables management solutions. Our company was the first in the industry established, owned and operated by certified collectors, and we continue to carry this distinction. All of the ...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:27
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
J.P. Morgan

J.P. Morgan

270 Park Avenue, New York, NY, US, 10017

Last Update: 19/06/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.jpmorgan.com
811/1000Good

J.P. Morgan is a leader in financial services, offering solutions to clients in more than 100 countries with one of the most comprehensive global product platforms available. We have been helping our clients to do business and manage their wealth for more than 200 years...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:82,484
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.

Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.

-
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
J.P. Morgan

J.P. Morgan

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc. in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

J.P. Morgan has 3.85% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - J.P. Morgan (X = Date, Y = Severity)

J.P. Morgan cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.

Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
LAM724082025
J.P. Morgan

J.P. Morgan

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
NYLJPMOUTOUT1773678705
🔒 Incident : Breach
JPM004091825

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66339
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in libsoup. After a CONNECT tunnel is established through an HTTP proxy, libsoup incorrectly attaches the Proxy-Authorization header to subsequent HTTPS requests sent through that tunnel to the destination server. This allows the destination server to capture proxy credentials, leading to information disclosure.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-24
UPDATED
Date2026-07-24
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66338
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in libsoup. The chunked transfer encoding parser uses a permissive parsing function for chunk sizes that silently accepts inputs violating RFC 9112, including leading whitespace, plus sign prefixes, and trailing invalid characters. When libsoup operates behind a strict frontend proxy, this parsing differential can be exploited to smuggle HTTP requests.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-24
UPDATED
Date2026-07-24
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-66337
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in libsoup. An unsigned integer underflow in the soup_filter_input_stream_read_until() function causes a heap buffer over-read when parsing multipart HTTP responses. A malicious HTTP server can exploit this by sending a crafted multipart response, potentially causing the client application to crash or disclose sensitive heap memory.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-24
UPDATED
Date2026-07-24
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-61892
SUMMARY

Weintek cMT3092X HMI allows a non-privileged user to modify tokens to escalate privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-24
UPDATED
Date2026-07-24
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-61886
SUMMARY

Weintek cMT3092X HMI stores user account passwords in plaintext.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-24
UPDATED
Date2026-07-24
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8