Comparison Overview

LIC

VS

Marsh

LIC

None
Last Update: 2025-11-20

State owned public sector life insurance corporation.Largest financial institution &life insurance organization in India. Central office in Mumbai ,with 8 Zonal offices,109 divisional offices,2048 fully computerised branches and to serve rural people LIC now opened 992 satelite offices in rural areas . Hisrory:245 Indian and foreign insurers and provident societies are taken over by the central government and nationalised. LIC formed by an Act of Parliament, viz. LIC Act, 1956, with a capital contribution of Rs. 5 crore from the Government of India. The Parliament of India passed the Life Insurance Corporation Act on the 19th of June 1956, and the Life Insurance Corporation of India was created on 1st September, 1956. On 1st of September 1956, The Life Insurance Corporation of India ( LIC ) embarked upon its momentous journey in true spirit of serving the people and nation as a whole. Since then it has spearheaded the financial and infrastructure development of the nation. The performance of LIC has been exemplary and it has been growing from strength to strength be it customer base, agency network, branch office network, and the like. LIC has played a significant role in spreading life insurance among the masses and mobilization of people’s money for people’s welfare. Even after the entry of private insurers for almost a decade now, LIC continues to be the front runner in the industry in terms of market share. Mission: "A trans-nationally competitive financial conglomerate of significance to societies and Pride of India." Products:We have in our basket more than 40 different plans catering to the differing needs of different segments of the society – basic insurance plans (whole life, endowment and money back), Term Assurance Plans, Pension Plans, Capital Market linked Plans, Health Plan etc.

NAICS: 524
NAICS Definition: Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees: 80,036
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Marsh

1166 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York, 10036, US
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

We help our clients and colleagues grow — and our communities thrive — by protecting and promoting Possibility. We seek better ways to manage risk and define more effective paths to the right outcome. We go beyond risk to rewards for our clients, our company, our colleagues, and the communities in which we serve. Marsh, a business of Marsh McLennan (NYSE: MMC), is the world’s top insurance broker and risk advisor. Marsh McLennan is a global leader in risk, strategy and people, advising clients in 130 countries across four businesses: Marsh, Guy Carpenter, Mercer and Oliver Wyman. With annual revenue of $23 billion and more than 85,000 colleagues, Marsh McLennan helps build the confidence to thrive through the power of perspective.

NAICS: 524
NAICS Definition: Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees: 27,488
Subsidiaries: 29
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lic.jpeg
LIC
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/marsh.jpeg
Marsh
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
LIC
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Marsh
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LIC in 2025.

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Marsh in 2025.

Incident History — LIC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LIC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Marsh (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Marsh cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lic.jpeg
LIC
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/marsh.jpeg
Marsh
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 04/2021
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2013
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Marsh company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to LIC company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Marsh company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas LIC company has not reported any.

In the current year, Marsh company and LIC company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Marsh company nor LIC company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Marsh company has disclosed at least one data breach, while LIC company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Marsh company nor LIC company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither LIC company nor Marsh company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither LIC nor Marsh holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Marsh company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to LIC company.

LIC company employs more people globally than Marsh company, reflecting its scale as a Insurance.

Neither LIC nor Marsh holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither LIC nor Marsh holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither LIC nor Marsh holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither LIC nor Marsh holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither LIC nor Marsh holds HIPAA certification.

Neither LIC nor Marsh 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