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

Comparison Overview

Mint Digital ServicesMint Digital Services
VS
SpotifySpotify
Mint Digital Services

Mint Digital Services

Bellariastrasse 82, Zurich, 8038, CH

Last Update: 23/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://mintservices.com
758/1000Fair

Mint Digital Services is one of the forerunners in global digital music administration. On behalf of collective management organizations, independent management entities, songwriters, composers and publishers Mint administers agreements with digital music services and o...

NAICS:71113
NAICS Definition:Musical Groups and Artists
Employees:40
Subsidiaries:17
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Spotify

Spotify

Regeringsgatan 19, Stockholm, Stockholm County, SE

Last Update: 01/09/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.lifeatspotify.com
739/1000Moderate

Our mission is to unlock the potential of human creativity—by giving a million creative artists the opportunity to live off their art and billions of fans the opportunity to enjoy and be inspired by it. Spotify transformed music listening forever when it launched in S...

NAICS:71113
NAICS Definition:Musical Groups and Artists
Employees:18,042
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
4

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Mint Digital Services

Mint Digital Services

-
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
Spotify

Spotify

-
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 Musicians Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Mint Digital Services in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Musicians Industry Avg (This Year)

Spotify has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Mint Digital Services (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mint Digital Services cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Spotify (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Spotify 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...
Mint Digital Services

Mint Digital Services

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Spotify

Spotify

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
SPOMICADO1781202325
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
ISRSPOWHA1778675186
🔒 Incident : Breach
SPO1766397392

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-93740
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. Affected is the function formWlEncrypt of the file /boafrm/formWlEncrypt. The manipulation of the argument submit-url leads to buffer overflow. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS2
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-93739
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. This impacts the function formWlAc of the file /boafrm/formWlAc. Executing a manipulation of the argument submit-url can lead to buffer overflow. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-75885
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in the OpenShift console. Unauthenticated access to the `/api/devfile/` and `/api/devfile/samples/` endpoints allows a remote attacker to send crafted devfile payloads. This can lead to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), where the console pod makes requests to internal services and reflects partial responses to the attacker. Additionally, by sending repeated large requests without a specified content length, an attacker can cause unbounded memory growth, leading to a Denial of Service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-93894
SUMMARY

In Vinyl Cache before 9.0,2, workspace buffer overflow vulnerability was found in the .upper() and .lower() string type methods of VCL. This can be used as a remote denial of service (DoS) vector to make the child process segfault or assert, and then restart. Effectively exploiting this vulnerability requires prior knowledge about the VCL in use and the ability to craft a request that contains a string that is long enough to fill the remaining workspace at the call site while staying under the different request size limits (http_req_size, http_req_hdr_len, etc.).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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:N/R:A/V:D/RE:L/U:Clear
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-93738
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. This affects the function formSchedule of the file /boafrm/formSchedule. Performing a manipulation of the argument webpage results in buffer overflow. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1