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

Comparison Overview

Mastercard Global PartnershipsMastercard Global Partnerships
VS
Manappuram Finance LimitedManappuram Finance Limited
Mastercard Global Partnerships

Mastercard Global Partnerships

2000 Purchase St, Purchase, 10577, US

Last Update: 09/03/2026

View Profile

Whether you’re looking to drive growth with new revenue streams, reduce costs by driving operational efficiencies or diversify your business, Mastercard can help. We collaborate with like-minded partners, in and beyond payments, by applying Mastercard’s expertise, insi...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Manappuram Finance Limited

Manappuram Finance Limited

IV / 470 (old) W638A (New), Manappuram House, Thrissur, 680567, IN

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.manappuram.com
778/1000Fair

Manappuram Finance Ltd. is one of India’s largest and most trusted gold loan companies, with 4,199 branches across the length and breadth of the country. It currently has nearly Rs. 157.65 billion worth assets under management (AUM), and 20,185 employees. Promoted by S...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:15,218
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Mastercard Global Partnerships

Mastercard Global Partnerships

-
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
Manappuram Finance Limited

Manappuram Finance Limited

-
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 Mastercard Global Partnerships in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Manappuram Finance Limited in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Mastercard Global Partnerships (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mastercard Global Partnerships cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Manappuram Finance Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Manappuram Finance Limited 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...
Mastercard Global Partnerships

Mastercard Global Partnerships

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Manappuram Finance Limited

Manappuram Finance Limited

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1