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

Comparison Overview

MassMutual OregonMassMutual Oregon
VS
Lars Larsen GroupLars Larsen Group
MassMutual Oregon

MassMutual Oregon

5885 Meadows Road, Suite 850, Lake Oswego, Oregon, 97035, US

Last Update: 20/01/2026

View Profile
753/1000Fair

At MassMutual Oregon, we help you define what you want out of life. Then, we map out financial strategies to help you get there. We work with you to help minimize risk, protect your assets, reduce taxes and build your long-term wealth. Based in Lake Oswego, MassMutual...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:31
Subsidiaries:61
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Lars Larsen Group

Lars Larsen Group

Randersvej 2.c, 8600 Silkeborg, DK

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
771/1000Fair

Lars Larsen Group is owned by the Brunsborg family, descendants of JYSK founder Lars Larsen. The Group owns companies within a number of business areas including furniture, interior design, restaurants and hotels, and is also an active investor in equities, funds, and r...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:16,177
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
MassMutual Oregon

MassMutual Oregon

-
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
Lars Larsen Group

Lars Larsen Group

-
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 MassMutual Oregon in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lars Larsen Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - MassMutual Oregon (X = Date, Y = Severity)

MassMutual Oregon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Lars Larsen Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lars Larsen Group 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...
MassMutual Oregon

MassMutual Oregon

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Lars Larsen Group

Lars Larsen Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
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
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
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
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
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