Comparison Overview

Movistar (Telefónica Hispam)

VS

Telecom Argentina

Movistar (Telefónica Hispam)

Montevideo, UY
Last Update: 2026-01-16

En Movistar (Telefónica Hispam), tenemos como Misión hacer nuestro mundo más humano, conectando la vida de las personas porque ellas son las que dan sentido a la tecnología y no al revés. Creemos que las conexiones más importantes son las conexiones humanas, por eso unimos a las personas en lugar de aislarlas y las invitamos a ser ellas mismas, a expresarse, a compartir. Aspiramos a ser inclusivos digitalizando a toda la sociedad, sin dejar a nadie atrás.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 10,239
Subsidiaries: 24
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Telecom Argentina

Calle General Hornos 690, Comuna 1, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, AR, 1272
Last Update: 2026-01-17

We are Telecom Argentina, a connectivity solutions and entertainment company with over 23,000 collaborators throughout the country. We transform the digital experience of our over 28 million customers providing them a secure, flexible and dynamic service on all of their devices, with high speed mobile and fixed connections, and a live and on-demand contents platform which includes series, films, gaming, music and TV shows. Through our commercial brands Personal, Fibertel, Flow and Telecom | Fibercorp, we provide services such as fixed and mobile telephony, data transmission, pay TV and Internet, for individuals, companies and institutions throughout the country. We are also present in Paraguay, providing mobile service, and in Uruguay, with pay TV. We are leaders in an industry that has become one of the pillars for the social and economic development of our country, and we are active participants in the community with sustainable practices and initiatives that add value to the use of technology as a tool for training and social inclusion.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 14,254
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/movistar-telefonica-hispam.jpeg
Movistar (Telefónica Hispam)
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/telecom-argentina.jpeg
Telecom Argentina
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Movistar (Telefónica Hispam)
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Telecom Argentina
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) in 2026.

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Telecom Argentina in 2026.

Incident History — Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Telecom Argentina (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Telecom Argentina cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/movistar-telefonica-hispam.jpeg
Movistar (Telefónica Hispam)
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Breach
Motivation: Extortion
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Internal Jira development and ticketing server
Motivation: Ransom
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/telecom-argentina.jpeg
Telecom Argentina
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/1990
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Telecom Argentina company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Telecom Argentina company.

In the current year, Telecom Argentina company and Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Both Telecom Argentina company and Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company have confirmed experiencing at least one ransomware attack.

Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Telecom Argentina company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Telecom Argentina company nor Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company nor Telecom Argentina company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) nor Telecom Argentina holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Telecom Argentina company.

Telecom Argentina company employs more people globally than Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) company, reflecting its scale as a Telecommunications.

Neither Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) nor Telecom Argentina holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) nor Telecom Argentina holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) nor Telecom Argentina holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) nor Telecom Argentina holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) nor Telecom Argentina holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Movistar (Telefónica Hispam) nor Telecom Argentina holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N