Comparison Overview

Level 3 Communications

VS

Deutsche Telekom

Level 3 Communications

1025 Eldorado Blvd, None, Broomfield, Colorado, US, 80021
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

CenturyLink (NYSE: CTL) is a technology leader delivering hybrid networking, cloud connectivity, and security solutions to customers around the world. Through its extensive global fiber network, CenturyLink provides secure and reliable services to meet the growing digital demands of businesses and consumers. CenturyLink strives to be the trusted connection to the networked world and is focused on delivering technology that enhances the customer experience.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 6,794
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Deutsche Telekom

Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 140, Bonn, Germany, 53113, DE
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Welcome to Deutsche Telekom. As one of the world's most valuable brands, we design innovative solutions and products in the areas of connectivity, networks, digitalization and security. #connectingyourworld At Deutsche Telekom, we believe that each and every one of us has the power to move society forward. That's why we're committed to creating a culture of collaboration and innovation that everyone can participate in. We believe that diversity and inclusion are the key to creative solutions. Our employees work in 34 countries worldwide. As a leading employer, we support them with offers and benefits that enrich their work and private life. These include flexible working hours, hybrid and remote work, learning and development opportunities, health and wellbeing, as well as attractive employee benefits.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 66,644
Subsidiaries: 64
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/level-3-communications.jpeg
Level 3 Communications
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/telekom.jpeg
Deutsche Telekom
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
Level 3 Communications
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Deutsche Telekom
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Level 3 Communications in 2025.

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Deutsche Telekom in 2025.

Incident History — Level 3 Communications (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Level 3 Communications cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Deutsche Telekom (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Deutsche Telekom cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/level-3-communications.jpeg
Level 3 Communications
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Password Guessing Attack
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/telekom.jpeg
Deutsche Telekom
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Deutsche Telekom company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Level 3 Communications company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Level 3 Communications company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Deutsche Telekom company has not reported any.

In the current year, Deutsche Telekom company and Level 3 Communications company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Deutsche Telekom company nor Level 3 Communications company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Level 3 Communications company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Deutsche Telekom company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Deutsche Telekom company nor Level 3 Communications company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Level 3 Communications company nor Deutsche Telekom company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Level 3 Communications nor Deutsche Telekom holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Deutsche Telekom company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Level 3 Communications company.

Deutsche Telekom company employs more people globally than Level 3 Communications company, reflecting its scale as a Telecommunications.

Neither Level 3 Communications nor Deutsche Telekom holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Level 3 Communications nor Deutsche Telekom holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Level 3 Communications nor Deutsche Telekom holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Level 3 Communications nor Deutsche Telekom holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Level 3 Communications nor Deutsche Telekom holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Level 3 Communications nor Deutsche Telekom 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