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

Comparison Overview

Najm Company for Insurance ServicesNajm Company for Insurance Services
VS
DEKRADEKRA
Najm Company for Insurance Services

Najm Company for Insurance Services

Ath Thumamah Road, As Sahafah, Riyadh, 13315, SA

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.najm.sa
769/1000Fair

Najm for Insurance Services is a Saudi closed joint stock company established in 2007. It is subject to the supervision and control of the Insurance Authority and licensed under license number: ع ق خ / ش/ 1 / 200711 issued on 17/11/1427 H, which was renewed on 15/05/144...

NAICS:92219
NAICS Definition:Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities
Employees:1,966
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
DEKRA

DEKRA

Handwerkstr. 15, Stuttgart, 70565, DE

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.dekra.com
782/1000Fair

For 100 years, DEKRA has been a trusted name in safety. Founded in 1925 with the original goal of improving road safety through vehicle inspections, DEKRA has grown to become the world's largest independent, non-listed expert organization in the field of testing, inspec...

NAICS:92219
NAICS Definition:Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities
Employees:14,373
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Najm Company for Insurance Services

Najm Company for Insurance 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
DEKRA

DEKRA

-
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 Public Safety Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Najm Company for Insurance Services in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Public Safety Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for DEKRA in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Najm Company for Insurance Services (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Najm Company for Insurance 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 - DEKRA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DEKRA 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...
Najm Company for Insurance Services

Najm Company for Insurance Services

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
DEKRA

DEKRA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-111865
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in THU-MIG yoloe up to 40cd606cabdbe2b566d6f14a6b162c89206e9a1b. This affects the function eval of the file ultralytics/nn/autobackend.py of the component AutoBackend Model Loading. The manipulation of the argument imgsz/names/kpt_shape results in improper neutralization of directives in dynamically evaluated code. The attack requires a local approach. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-17
UPDATED
Date2026-10-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-111934
SUMMARY

Coder before 2.34.7 contains an IP spoofing vulnerability in the ExtractRealIPAddress middleware that trusts the leftmost, client-supplied X-Forwarded-For value instead of the client IP appended by a reverse proxy. Attackers can send forged X-Forwarded-For values through appending proxies to bypass per-IP rate limits on login, one-time passcode, and password validation endpoints, enabling brute-force attacks, and to falsify IP addresses recorded in audit logs.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-17
UPDATED
Date2026-10-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-111933
SUMMARY

Coder before 2.29.17, 2.30.0 before 2.32.7, 2.33.0 before 2.33.8, and 2.34.0 before 2.34.2 contains a user enumeration vulnerability because userpassword.Compare() substitutes a placeholder hash derived from the string "hunter2" when a stored password hash is empty. Unauthenticated attackers can submit logins with the password "hunter2" and distinguish HTTP 403 from 401 responses to enumerate valid accounts and reveal the authentication provider of SSO-only users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-17
UPDATED
Date2026-10-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-111932
SUMMARY

Coder before 2.29.17, 2.30.0 before 2.32.7, 2.33.0 before 2.33.8, and 2.34.0 before 2.34.2 contains a stored HTML injection vulnerability because the ApplicationName and LogoURL appearance settings are rendered into HTML output without sufficient escaping. Attackers with the Owner role can store HTML markup in these settings that renders in the Coder dashboard and in SMTP notification emails sent to other deployment users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-17
UPDATED
Date2026-10-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.7
CVE-2026-111931
SUMMARY

Coder from 2.0.0 before 2.34.8 contains an open redirect vulnerability in handleAPIKeySmuggling that allows attackers to redirect users externally via unsanitized r.URL.Path values. Attackers can craft links on trusted workspace app subdomains with paths beginning with double slashes, which become scheme-relative redirects to attacker sites for phishing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-17
UPDATED
Date2026-10-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8