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

Comparison Overview

Navajo SystemsNavajo Systems
VS
MastercardMastercard
Navajo Systems

Navajo Systems

28 Chevron St., Jerusalem, 93542, IL

Last Update: 26/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.NavajoSystems.com
768/1000Fair

Navajo Systems'​ vision is to dramatically expand the use of SaaS applications by eliminating the barriers related to data security and regulatory concerns. Founded by experts in the fields of information security, infrastructure security and Web application security, N...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:46
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Mastercard

Mastercard

2000 Purchase St, Purchase, NY, US, 10577

Last Update: 05/10/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.mastercard.com
805/1000Good

Mastercard powers economies and empowers people in 200+ countries and territories worldwide. Together with our customers, we’re building a sustainable economy where everyone can prosper. We support a wide range of digital payments choices, making transactions secure, si...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:43,687
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Navajo Systems

Navajo Systems

-
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
Mastercard

Mastercard

-
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 Navajo Systems in 2026.

Incidents

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

Mastercard has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Navajo Systems (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Navajo Systems cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Mastercard 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...
Navajo Systems

Navajo Systems

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Mastercard

Mastercard

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
GOOPAYMASBOOAIR1791211015
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
MAS05510423

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-22061
SUMMARY

Trident versions v25.02.1 through v26.06.1 are susceptible to a vulnerability that could allow an authenticated attacker with access to debug logs to view LUKS passphrases or SMB Active Directory credentials.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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-2026-108269
SUMMARY

Remote Attestation TLS Clients provides multi-language utilities for verifying attested TLS connections. Prior to 0.5.0, the Rust and Go RA-TLS challenge verifiers accepted quote ReportData that was bound to the certificate public key and client nonce but not to the active TLS session before permitting application traffic. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing the clients to accept an attacker-terminated connection as the attested enclave. This issue is fixed in 0.5.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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-2026-108268
SUMMARY

Enclave OS Virtual runs container workloads inside confidential virtual machines with end-to-end attestation. Prior to tdx-v0.2.43 and tdx-gpu-v0.6.27, the TDX/GPU RA-TLS certificate issuer placed the certificate public-key hash and client nonce in quote ReportData but omitted a value bound to the active TLS session. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing a relying party to accept an attacker-terminated connection as the attested enclave. This issue is fixed in tdx-v0.2.43 and tdx-gpu-v0.6.27.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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-2026-108267
SUMMARY

Privasys Go is a maintained fork of the Go programming language that adds RA-TLS support to crypto/tls. Prior to privasys-v0.5.1-go1.26.5, challenge-mode RA-TLS certificates bound quote ReportData to the certificate public key and client nonce but not to the active TLS session. An attacker who obtained an enclave TLS private key could relay a genuine quote onto another connection, causing a relying party to accept a handshake terminated by the attacker as an attested enclave connection. This issue is fixed in privasys-v0.5.1-go1.26.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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-2026-92705
SUMMARY

Aegisub is a cross-platform advanced subtitle editor. From 3.2.0 to 3.4.2, Aegisub automatically loads Automation scripts referenced by `Automation Scripts` metadata in `ASS` subtitle projects without asking whether the user trusts the scripts or their authors. An attacker can distribute a crafted `ASS` file together with a referenced malicious Automation script, and opening the `AS`  file executes arbitrary code with the privileges of the Aegisub process. From 3.4.0 to 3.4.2, inconsistent handling of embedded `NUL` characters between extension validation and filesystem operations additionally allows a crafted `ASS/Lua` polyglot to reference and execute itself as a single-file variant. The vulnerability is fixed in Aegisub 3.5.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-09
UPDATED
Date2026-10-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8