Comparison Overview
M&T Bank
M&T Bank
345 Main St., Buffalo, 14203, US
Last Update: 22/04/2026
Great companies have an enduring sense of purpose. At M&T, our purpose is a simple one: make a difference in people’s lives and uplift the communities we serve. Founded in 1856 in Buffalo, NY we are now a top 11 full-service US-based commercial bank with a retail footpr...
Vanguard
100 Vanguard Blvd, Valley Forge, 19482, US
Last Update: 02/04/2026
We are a community of 50 million who think—and feel—differently about investing. Together, we’re changing the way the world invests. For over 50 years, Vanguard has helped people pursue their financial goals with a spotlight on long-term value and low costs. We’ve mad...
Compliance Ranges Comparison
M&T Bank
Vanguard
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
M&T Bank has 46.24% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Vanguard in 2026.
Incident History - M&T Bank (X = Date, Y = Severity)
M&T Bank cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Vanguard (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Vanguard cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents
M&T Bank
Vanguard
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
phpMyFAQ before 4.1.5 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability in GroupController::updatePermissions that allows GROUP_EDIT administrators to grant arbitrary rights to groups without verifying they hold those rights themselves. A delegated administrator can exploit this by assigning high-value permissions to a group they belong to, inheriting those rights and escalating privileges up to full administrative control.
n8n before 2.25.7 and 2.26.x before 2.26.2 contains an abstract syntax tree (AST) security validator bypass in the Python Code node. An authenticated user with permission to create or modify workflows containing a Python Code node can bypass the validator and access the task executor module namespace. The issue only affects self-hosted instances where the Python Task Runner is enabled; where N8N_BLOCK_RUNNER_ENV_ACCESS is configured to allow it, this can disclose environment variables accessible to the task runner process.
Grav CMS before 2.0.0-beta.2 contains multiple code-execution vulnerabilities. Three unsafe unserialize() calls - in Scheduler\JobQueue, Framework\Cache\Adapter\FileCache, and Session - deserialize untrusted data without restricting allowed classes, enabling PHP object injection and, via a gadget chain, arbitrary code execution where an attacker controls the serialized input. Additionally, InstallCommand's git clone operation passes the branch, url, and path parameters into a shell command without escaping, allowing OS command injection via plugin/theme installation (which requires admin access). A Twig security blocklist bypass (server-side template injection) is also present. The issues are fixed in 2.0.0-beta.2.
Storage Concentrator (SC & SCVM) contains a command injection vulnerability within the debug.pl script that is reachable without authentication. A remote attacker can submit a specially crafted HTTP request containing a malicious payload that is processed without adequate input sanitization, resulting in arbitrary command execution with root-level privileges on the underlying system.
Storage Concentrator (SC & SCVM) contains a command injection vulnerability in the ms_service.pl service, which listens on TCP port 9000 by default and accepts custom network packets to perform device actions. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a specially crafted packet containing a malicious payload that is processed without adequate sanitization, resulting in arbitrary command execution with root-level privileges.