Comparison Overview

Lion Finance Group PLC

VS

Canara Bank

Lion Finance Group PLC

None
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

Lion Finance Group PLC (formerly Bank of Georgia Group PLC) is a FTSE 250 holding company, whose main operating subsidiaries are leading, customer-centric universal banks – Bank of Georgia in Georgia and Ameriabank in Armenia. Building on our competitive strengths, we drive business growth and maintain high profitability. We generate strong returns, create opportunities for our stakeholders, and make a positive impact in the communities where we operate.

NAICS: 52211
NAICS Definition: Commercial Banking
Employees: 10,001
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Canara Bank

undefined, undefined, undefined, undefined, IN
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Widely known for customer centricity, Canara Bank was founded by Shri Ammembal Subba Rao Pai, a great visionary and philanthropist, in July 1906, at Mangalore, then a small port in Karnataka. The Bank has gone through the various phases of its growth trajectory over hundred years of its existence. Growth of Canara Bank was phenomenal, especially after nationalization in the year 1969, attaining the status of a national level player in terms of geographical reach and clientele segments. Eighties was characterized by business diversification for the Bank. In June 2006, the Bank completed a century of operation in the Indian banking industry. The eventful journey of the Bank was strewn with many memorable milestones. Today, Canara Bank occupies a premier position in the comity of Indian banks. With an unbroken record of profits since its inception, Canara Bank has several firsts to its credit.

NAICS: 52211
NAICS Definition: Commercial Banking
Employees: 21,692
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lion-finance-group-plc.jpeg
Lion Finance Group PLC
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/canara-bank.jpeg
Canara Bank
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
Lion Finance Group PLC
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Canara Bank
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Banking Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lion Finance Group PLC in 2025.

Incidents vs Banking Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Canara Bank in 2025.

Incident History — Lion Finance Group PLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lion Finance Group PLC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Canara Bank (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Canara Bank cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lion-finance-group-plc.jpeg
Lion Finance Group PLC
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/canara-bank.jpeg
Canara Bank
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Canara Bank company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Lion Finance Group PLC company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Canara Bank company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Lion Finance Group PLC company.

In the current year, Canara Bank company and Lion Finance Group PLC company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Canara Bank company nor Lion Finance Group PLC company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Canara Bank company nor Lion Finance Group PLC company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Canara Bank company nor Lion Finance Group PLC company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC company nor Canara Bank company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC nor Canara Bank holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC company nor Canara Bank company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Canara Bank company employs more people globally than Lion Finance Group PLC company, reflecting its scale as a Banking.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC nor Canara Bank holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC nor Canara Bank holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC nor Canara Bank holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC nor Canara Bank holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC nor Canara Bank holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Lion Finance Group PLC nor Canara Bank 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