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

Comparison Overview

Nomura Asset ManagementNomura Asset Management
VS
OdebrechtOdebrecht
Nomura Asset Management

Nomura Asset Management

1-12-1 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, Tokyo, undefined, 103-8260, JP

Last Update: 16/03/2026

View Profile
751/1000Fair

The Nomura Asset Management Group is a leading global investment manager. Headquartered in Tokyo, Nomura has additional investment offices throughout the world including Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Taipei, Frankfurt, London and New York. With a global ...

NAICS:523
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:666
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Odebrecht

Odebrecht

Av. Luís Viana, 2841, Salvador, 41730-900, BR

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.novonor.com.br/
783/1000Fair

Founded in 1944, Odebrecht is a Brazilian group with diverse businesses and world-class standards of quality. Its Members, guided by the Group’s own philosophy, the Odebrecht Entrepreneurial Technology (TEO), provide services and manufacture products for clients on fiv...

NAICS:5239
NAICS Definition:Other Financial Investment Activities
Employees:14,112
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Nomura Asset Management

Nomura Asset Management

-
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
Odebrecht

Odebrecht

-
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 Investment Management Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Nomura Asset Management in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Investment Management Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Odebrecht in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Nomura Asset Management (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Nomura Asset Management cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Odebrecht 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...
Nomura Asset Management

Nomura Asset Management

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Odebrecht

Odebrecht

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-48777
SUMMARY

FileBrowser Quantum is a free, self-hosted, web-based file manager. Versions prior to 1.3.2-stable, 1.4.0-beta and 1.4.1-beta are vulnerable to Path Traversal through the publicPatchHandler in backend/http/public.go which joins user-controlled fromPath and toPath body fields with the trusted d.share.Path BEFORE the downstream sanitizer runs. Because filepath.Join collapses .. segments during the join, the sanitizer in resourcePatchHandler never sees the traversal and the move/copy/rename operates on a path outside the shared directory. The same root-cause pattern was patched for the bulk DELETE endpoint as CVE-2026-44542 (GHSA-fwj3-42wh-8673), but the PATCH handler with the identical pattern was not updated. A public share link with AllowModify=true is sufficient to exploit this. Anyone holding such a link can move, copy, or rename arbitrary files within the share owner's source root. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.3.3-stable and 1.4.2-beta.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/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-2026-47750
SUMMARY

stable-diffusion.cpp is a pure C/C++ library for running diffusion model (Stable Diffusion, Flux, Wan, Qwen Image, Z-Image, and more) inference. In versions prior to master-584-0a7ae07, the pickle .ckpt parser in src/model.cpp contained a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the GLOBAL opcode handler. The issue was caused by missing validation when searching for newline-delimited fields. A crafted .ckpt file without the expected newline could cause the parser to use -1 as a copy length, resulting in immediate heap corruption. The attack requires the victim or application to load a .ckpt file from an untrusted source, such as a downloaded model from a model sharing site. The issue has been resolved in version master-584-0a7ae07. If developers are unable to immediately update their applications they can work around this issue by following these instructions: do not load .ckpt checkpoint files from untrusted sources, and prefer trusted model sources and safer formats such as .safetensors where possible.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
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
CVE-2026-47747
SUMMARY

stable-diffusion.cpp is a pure C/C++ library for running diffusion model (Stable Diffusion, Flux, Wan, Qwen Image, Z-Image, and more) inference. In versions prior to master-584-0a7ae07, the pickle .ckpt parser in src/model.cpp contained a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the BINUNICODE opcode handler. The issue was caused by sign confusion on the opcode length field. A crafted .ckpt file could trigger memcpy with a very large length derived from a negative signed value, causing immediate heap corruption. The issue has been resolved in version master-584-0a7ae07. If developers are unable to immediately update their applications they can work around this issue by only loading .ckpt checkpoint files from trusted sources and preferring trusted model sources and safer formats such as .safetensors where possible.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
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
CVE-2026-46448
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Nova before 33.0.2, the server create API does not strip certain hint data. The resulting instance has no Placement allocation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-22313
SUMMARY

The device has a webserver that exposes a REST API authenticated with a token on the management network. By exploiting an OS command injection vulnerability an authenticated attacker can send arbitrary commands to the device that are executed with administrative permissions by the underlying operating system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3