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

Comparison Overview

NightwingNightwing
VS
Tecnicas ReunidasTecnicas Reunidas
Nightwing

Nightwing

N/A

Last Update: 19/05/2026

View Profile
Between 600 and 649
http://nightwing.com
621/1000Poor

We are the intelligence services company that continually redefines the edge of the possible to keep advancing our national security interests.

NAICS:54139
NAICS Definition:Engineering Services
Employees:988
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2
Tecnicas Reunidas

Tecnicas Reunidas

Avenida de Burgos, 89, Madrid, Community of Madrid, ES

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
762/1000Fair

TR is an international general contractor engaged in the engineering and construction of industrial facilities in the fields of: -Oil & Gas -Refining & Petrochemical -Power Generation -Infrastructures and industries -Energy Transition Engaging in the engineering, desi...

NAICS:54139
NAICS Definition:Engineering Services
Employees:11,604
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Nightwing

Nightwing

-
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
Tecnicas Reunidas

Tecnicas Reunidas

-
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 Engineering Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Nightwing has 33.33% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Engineering Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tecnicas Reunidas in 2026.

Incidents

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

Nightwing cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Tecnicas Reunidas (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tecnicas Reunidas 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...
Nightwing

Nightwing

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
CISNIG1779150346
🔒 Incident : Breach
NIGCIS1779216319
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
NIG4592545102425
Tecnicas Reunidas

Tecnicas Reunidas

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-94426
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in xuxueli xxl-job up to 3.5.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /jobgroup/insert. This manipulation of the argument Name causes cross site scripting. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.5)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-94425
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Moore Threads MTT S80 Driver Package 340.150. The affected element is the function sub_140006F0C in the library mtdispkm64.sys of the component IOCTL Handler. The manipulation results in improper privilege management. Attacking locally is a requirement. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2
CVE-2026-94627
SUMMARY

vLLM Mooncake connector through 0.29.0 fails to properly manage GPU KV cache block ownership when concurrent child requests share a single transfer ID in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments. Attackers can trigger GPU memory exhaustion by submitting completion requests with multiple prompts, causing orphaned KV cache blocks to accumulate until process restart and eventually preventing legitimate requests from executing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-94626
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 fails to validate the tp_size parameter in kv_transfer_params on OpenAI-compatible completion endpoints, allowing attackers to allocate unbounded memory. Attackers can supply arbitrary tp_size values in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments to exhaust memory and trigger kernel OOM-kill of the decode worker process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-94625
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 contains a resource exhaustion vulnerability in MooncakeConnector where rejected prefill requests create ownerless transfer placeholders that are never reclaimed. Attackers can send rejected requests to exhaust sender task pools, causing valid requests to be delayed by up to 480 seconds while health checks continue returning success.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9