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

Comparison Overview

metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbHmetafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH
VS
Infosys BPMInfosys BPM
metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH

metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH

Leopoldstraße 146, Munich, 80804, DE

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://metafinanz.de/
755/1000Fair

For over 35 years, metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH, a business and IT consulting company, has been at the side of its customers in an increasingly digital and dynamic world. Our promise: We shine a new light on future viability. We enable our customers to find, deve...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:785
Subsidiaries:95
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Infosys BPM

Infosys BPM

Infosys BPM Limited, Plot no 26/3, 26/4, 26/6, Hosur Road, Electronics City, Bengaluru, 560100, IN

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.infosysbpm.com
814/1000Good

Infosys BPM Ltd., the business process management subsidiary of Infosys Ltd. (NYSE: INFY), was set up in April 2002. Infosys BPM focuses on integrated end-to-end outsourcing and delivers transformational benefits to its clients through reduced costs, ongoing productivit...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:43,598
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH

metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH

-
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
Infosys BPM

Infosys BPM

-
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 metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Infosys BPM in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH (X = Date, Y = Severity)

metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Infosys BPM (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Infosys BPM 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...
metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH

metafinanz Informationssysteme GmbH

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Infosys BPM

Infosys BPM

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-9044
SUMMARY

An OS command injection vulnerability exists in the VPN module of TP-Link AXE75 V1 routers. This vulnerability allows an adjacent, authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the device by importing a specially crafted VPN client configuration file. The issue arises from improper filtering of special characters.  Successful exploitation of this vulnerability may enable an attacker to gain full control of the affected device, potentially compromising configuration integrity, network security, and service availability.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-31
UPDATED
Date2026-07-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:L/SA:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-54909
SUMMARY

pion/stun is a Go implementation of STUN. Prior to 3.1.3, XORMappedAddress.GetFromAs can panic while parsing a malformed short XOR-MAPPED-ADDRESS attribute in STUN or ICE Binding-response parsing paths, allowing remote denial of service. This issue is fixed in version 3.1.3.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-31
UPDATED
Date2026-07-31
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:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54785
SUMMARY

gemini-bridge is a lightweight MCP server bridging AI agents to Google's Gemini AI via the official CLI. From 1.0.0 until 1.3.1, consult_gemini_with_files in inline mode read any file path supplied in the files argument without confining it to the working directory, then forwarded the contents to the Gemini CLI. Because the caller also controls query, the file contents are echoed back through the Gemini round-trip (and sent to Google), making this an arbitrary local file read. This issue is fixed in version 1.3.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-31
UPDATED
Date2026-07-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.5
CVE-2026-54768
SUMMARY

WPGraphQL provides a GraphQL API for WordPress sites. From 2.0.0 until 2.15.1, the deprecated user field on SendPasswordResetEmailPayload lets an unauthenticated caller distinguish existing author-class accounts through the sendPasswordResetEmail mutation and obtain public profile fields. This issue is fixed in version 2.15.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-31
UPDATED
Date2026-07-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-53573
SUMMARY

GeoNetwork is a catalog application to manage spatially referenced resources. From 3.12.0 until 4.2.16 and 4.4.11, unsafe redirect validation in GeonetworkOAuth2LoginAuthenticationFilter and KeycloakAuthenticationProcessingFilter permits an attacker-controlled external redirect after login. This issue is fixed in versions 4.2.16 and 4.4.11.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-31
UPDATED
Date2026-07-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA