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

Comparison Overview

NayatelNayatel
VS
TIMTIM
Nayatel

Nayatel

73-E, GD Arcade, Fazal-E-Haq Road,, Islamabad, 44000, PK

Last Update: 21/04/2026

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

Nayatel is the leading fiber internet and IT service provider in Pakistan, delivering high-speed connectivity along with crystal-clear phone and HDTV, reliable cloud computing, secure web and email hosting, and cutting-edge digital solutions. Trusted by hundreds of thou...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:1,896
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
TIM

TIM

Via Gaetano Negri, 1, Milano, 20123, IT

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
783/1000Fair

We are driving the digital transition of Italy and Brazil with innovative technologies and services because we want to contribute to accelerating the sustainable growth of the economy and society by bringing value and prosperity to people, companies and institutions. W...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:22,280
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Nayatel

Nayatel

-
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
TIM

TIM

-
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 Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

Nayatel has 46.24% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for TIM in 2026.

Incidents

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

Nayatel cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

TIM 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...
Nayatel

Nayatel

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
NAY1776759980
TIM

TIM

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
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:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2