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

Comparison Overview

Mandiant (part of Google Cloud)Mandiant (part of Google Cloud)
VS
Palo Alto NetworksPalo Alto Networks
Mandiant (part of Google Cloud)

Mandiant (part of Google Cloud)

1600 Amphitheatre Pkwy, Mountain View, 94043, US

Last Update: 19/06/2026

View Profile
455/1000Critical

We’re determined to make organizations secure against cyber threats and confident in their readiness. Experience the same trusted cybersecurity solutions, now from Google Cloud.

NAICS:541514
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:1,393
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2
Palo Alto Networks

Palo Alto Networks

3000 Tannery Way, SANTA CLARA, California, US, 95054

Last Update: 16/06/2026

View Profile
720/1000Moderate

Palo Alto Networks, the global cybersecurity leader, is shaping the cloud-centric future with technology that is transforming the way people and organizations operate. Our mission is to be the cybersecurity partner of choice, protecting our digital way of life. We help ...

NAICS:541514
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:18,620
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
8
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Mandiant (part of Google Cloud)

Mandiant (part of Google Cloud)

-
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
Palo Alto Networks

Palo Alto Networks

-
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 Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)

Mandiant (part of Google Cloud) has 163.16% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)

Palo Alto Networks has 654.72% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Mandiant (part of Google Cloud) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mandiant (part of Google Cloud) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Palo Alto Networks (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Palo Alto Networks cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Mandiant (part of Google Cloud)

Mandiant (part of Google Cloud)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
MAN1781879096
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MAN1779107075
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MAN1776716698
Palo Alto Networks

Palo Alto Networks

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
PALHUAAMEMIC1781613039
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
PAL1780115030
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
PAL1775738158

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-56785
SUMMARY

FlatPress versions prior to commit 10be83c, contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in comment and contact forms where name, URL, and email fields are rendered without proper output encoding in Smarty templates. Attackers can inject arbitrary HTML and JavaScript through these fields to execute malicious scripts in browsers of viewers including administrators, or bypass URL scheme validation to inject javascript: or data: URIs.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-23
UPDATED
Date2026-06-23
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-54588
SUMMARY

Poweradmin is a web-based DNS administration tool for PowerDNS server. Versions prior to 4.2.4 and 4.3.3 use the attacker-controlled `HTTP_HOST` request header as the authoritative source for building callback URLs in its OIDC, SAML, and logout authentication flows without any validation. An unauthenticated attacker can poison the `redirect_uri` sent to the Identity Provider, causing the IdP to redirect the victim's authorization code to an attacker-controlled server - resulting in full account takeover with no credentials required. Versions 4.2.4 and 4.3.3 patch the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-23
UPDATED
Date2026-06-23
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-48493
SUMMARY

Snipe-IT is an IT asset/license management system. In versions prior to 8.6.0, a user with only users.edit can send a PATCH to /api/v1/users/{their_own_id} and grant themselves any permission except admin and superuser — for example `assets.view`, `assets.create`, `reports.view`, import, etc. The issue is patched in version 8.6.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-23
UPDATED
Date2026-06-23
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.2
CVE-2026-47693
SUMMARY

Poweradmin is a web-based DNS administration tool for PowerDNS server. Versions prior to 4.2.4 and 4.3.3 are vulnerable to CSV Injection (Formula Injection) in its log export functionality. User-controlled data — specifically the username field — is written to exported CSV files without sanitizing formula trigger characters (=, +, -, @). When an administrator exports activity logs and opens the resulting CSV in a spreadsheet application (Microsoft Excel, LibreOffice Calc, Google Sheets), any formula stored in a username is executed by the application. This can be used for phishing attacks against administrators or data exfiltration. Versions 4.2.4 and 4.3.3 patch the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-23
UPDATED
Date2026-06-23
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.7
CVE-2026-12164
SUMMARY

Fortra File Integrity Monitoring (FIM), formerly Tripwire Enterprise, versions prior to 9.4.0 may assign incorrect or elevated effective permissions to users created by the tetool import command while FIM is running, particularly when the import also creates or changes roles or role-permission relationships.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-23
UPDATED
Date2026-06-23
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
0.8