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

Comparison Overview

LuxCSDLuxCSD
VS
Motilal Oswal Financial Services LtdMotilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd
LuxCSD

LuxCSD

42, Avenue J.F. Kennedy, Luxembourg, undefined, 1855, LU

Last Update: 21/05/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.luxcsd.com/
752/1000Fair

LuxCSD provides Luxembourg’s financial community with services for settlement in EUR central bank money as well as with issuing and custody services for a wide variety of domestic and international securities including investment funds. In 2020, LuxCSD received its CSDR...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:11
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd

Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd

Junction of Gokhale & Sayani Road, Prabhadevi, Mumbai, 400025, IN

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
769/1000Fair

Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd. (MOFSL) was founded in 1987 as a small sub-broking unit, with just 2 people running the show. Focus on a customer-first attitude, ethical and transparent business practices, respect for professionalism, research-based value investin...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:14,363
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
LuxCSD

LuxCSD

-
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
Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd

Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd

-
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 LuxCSD in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - LuxCSD (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LuxCSD cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd 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...
LuxCSD

LuxCSD

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd

Motilal Oswal Financial Services Ltd

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-53646
SUMMARY

FOSSBilling is a free, open-source billing and client management system. In versions 0.5.6 through 0.7.2, when a `ClientPasswordReset` record already exists for a client (from a previous unexpired reset request), subsequent calls to the `reset_password` guest API endpoint reuse the existing token instead of generating a new one. The 15-minute validity window is anchored to the first request's `created_at` timestamp, not the time of the most recent email. An attacker who obtained the original reset link remains able to use it even after the victim requests a new reset, because the original token is never invalidated or rotated. Version 0.8.0 patches the issue. Some workarounds are available. Configure a reverse proxy (e.g., Nginx, Apache, Cloudflare) to apply per-IP rate limiting to the `/client/reset-password` endpoint to minimize the window of opportunity, and/or manually clear expired `client_password_reset` records from the database after a client reports a suspected compromise.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-06
UPDATED
Date2026-07-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-53645
SUMMARY

FOSSBilling is a free, open-source billing and client management system. Versions prior to 0.8.0 allow a low-privileged staff account to grant arbitrary module permissions to itself through the admin API, resulting in persistent privilege escalation. A staff user that only has `staff.create_and_edit_staff` can call `/api/admin/staff/permissions_update` targeting their own account and write any permission structure, bypassing the intended role-based access control boundary. Version 0.8.0 patches the issue. Some workarounds are available. Restrict the `staff.create_and_edit_staff` permission to only highly trusted staff members and/or use a reverse proxy or WAF to restrict access to `/api/admin/staff/permissions_update` to specific trusted roles.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-06
UPDATED
Date2026-07-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-53644
SUMMARY

FOSSBilling is a free, open-source billing and client management system. Versions 0.5.3 through 0.7.2 allow authenticated clients to both read and reset API key service secrets for orders that are no longer in an `active` state (e.g., `suspended`, `canceled`). The root cause is missing order-state validation in two client API endpoints, despite an `isActive()` helper already existing in the `Serviceapikey` module and the frontend UI correctly gating access on `order.status == 'active'`. Version 0.8.0 contains a fix. Some workarounds are available. If the `Serviceapikey` module is not needed, uninstall it to remove the affected endpoints. One may also use a reverse proxy or WAF to restrict access to `/api/client/order/service` and `/api/client/serviceapikey/reset` based on application-level order-state logic.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-06
UPDATED
Date2026-07-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-53643
SUMMARY

FOSSBilling is a free, open-source billing and client management system. Versions prior to 0.8.0 allow low-privileged staff accounts to perform unauthorized actions via admin API endpoints. The root cause is a combination of the `can_always_access` module flag (which grants all staff access to certain modules) and insufficient permission checks or unsafe parameter handling on individual endpoints. Version 0.8.0 contains a fix. Some workarounds are available. Restrict staff accounts to only those who need access to sensitive settings and/or use a reverse proxy or WAF to restrict access to the affected endpoints to trusted IP addresses or higher-privilege roles.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-06
UPDATED
Date2026-07-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-53642
SUMMARY

FOSSBilling is a free, open-source billing and client management system. In versions 0.5.6 through 0.7.2, when the "Require Email Confirmation" setting is enabled, a logged-in client with an unverified email address (`email_approved = 0`) can access all client-area pages (e.g. `/client/balance`, `/client/order/list`, `/client/invoice`) and read real account data, including wallet balances and transaction history. The API-side enforcement correctly restricts unverified clients to only profile-related endpoints, but the page-side enforcement is overly permissive, allowing any request whose path starts with `/client`. Version 0.8.0 contains a fix. No known workarounds that don't involve modifying the source code are available.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-06
UPDATED
Date2026-07-06
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA