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

Comparison Overview

Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova)Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova)
VS
GFT TechnologiesGFT Technologies
Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova)

Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova)

244 5th Avenue, New York,, 10001, US

Last Update: 02/10/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://arcova.com
709/1000Moderate

Lynx Technology Partners is now part of Arcova. Founded in 2009, Lynx Technology Partners built a strong reputation for excellence in cybersecurity, compliance, and strategic advisory services. The firm was known for its disciplined execution and relationship-driven ap...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:18
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
GFT Technologies

GFT Technologies

Schelmenwasenstr. 34, Stuttgart, 70567, DE

Last Update: 20/09/2026

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

GFT Technologies is an AI-centric global digital transformation company. We design advanced data and AI transformation solutions, modernize technology architectures and develop next-generation core systems for industry leaders in Banking, Insurance, Manufacturing and Ro...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:13,147
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova)

Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova)

-
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
GFT Technologies

GFT Technologies

-
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 IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for GFT Technologies in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - GFT Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)

GFT Technologies 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...
Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova)

Lynx Technology Partners (now Arcova)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
GITNPMCHEKEDLYN1790944654
GFT Technologies

GFT Technologies

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-93892
SUMMARY

IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 5.0.0 through 5.0.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to exposure of session tokens in the HTML response.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
REFERENCES
CVE-2026-93891
SUMMARY

IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 5.0.0 through 5.0.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to an XML external entity (XXE) injection flaw.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
REFERENCES
CVE-2026-92832
SUMMARY

IBM Aspera Enterprise WebApps 1.0.0 through 1.0.6 could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.5
REFERENCES
CVE-2026-85457
SUMMARY

IBM Planning Analytics 2.0, and 2.1 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a stack-based buffer overflow.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
REFERENCES
CVE-2026-84418
SUMMARY

IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 can allow a man-in-the-middle attacker to present a forged TLS certificate, intercept the connection, and capture the IAM bearer Authorization header automatically attached by the session adapter. The captured token grants full platform-scope tenant API access, enabling the attacker to read and manipulate the victim's DataStage projects, flows, assets, and pipeline definitions. This is client-side SDK code running on the user's own machine, so exploitation requires an external network interceptor rather than a co-tenant in the shared cluster.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
REFERENCES