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
PING ANPING AN
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
PING AN

PING AN

No. 5033 Yitian Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, 518046, CN

Last Update: 27/05/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://group.pingan.com/
830/1000Good

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 an...

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 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
PING AN

PING AN

-
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)

No incidents recorded for PING AN in 2026.

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 - PING AN (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PING AN 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...
Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.

Lamont, Hanley & Associates, Inc.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
LAM724082025
PING AN

PING AN

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-5270
SUMMARY

An authentication bypass vulnerability exists in certain releases of Ciena Navigator Network Control Suite (NCS), Manage Control Plan (MCP), and Blue Planet products. The issue is caused by improper handling of HTTP request paths and headers, which allows an unauthenticated attacker to manipulate requests in a manner that bypasses authentication and associated audit logging controls.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-14
UPDATED
Date2026-07-14
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-5269
SUMMARY

In Ciena's Navigator Network Control Suite (NCS) and Manage Control Plan (MCP), there are hidden system accounts used for internal software operations. Some of these accounts have default passwords that may be predictable. While these accounts have very limited permissions on their own, an attacker could combine an attack using one of these accounts with other potential weaknesses to launch a more significant attack, possibly leading to escalation of privilege on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-14
UPDATED
Date2026-07-14
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-51808
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in OpenHTJ2K v.0.18.4 and before allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code via the openhtj2k_decoder_impl::invoke, invoke_line_based, invoke_line_based_stream, and invoke_line_based_predecoded function in source/core/interface/decoder.cpp

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-14
UPDATED
Date2026-07-14
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-51807
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in OpenHTJ2K v.0.18.4 and before allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code via the j2k_precinct_subband::parse_packet_header() in source/core/coding/coding_units.cpp

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-14
UPDATED
Date2026-07-14
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-36035
SUMMARY

Incorrect access control in the /api/License/deactivateOffline endpoint of CAXPerts UniversalPlantViewer WebServices Server v2.7.6 allows authenticated attackers with low-level privileges to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via removing the license from the webserver.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-14
UPDATED
Date2026-07-14
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA