Comparison Overview

Nordea

VS

CIB Egypt

Nordea

Aleksanterinkatu 36 B, Helsinki, FI
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 800 and 849

We are a universal bank with a 200-year history of supporting and growing the Nordic economies – enabling dreams and aspirations for a greater good. Every day, we work to support our customers’ financial development, delivering best-in-class omnichannel customer experiences and driving sustainable change. We are a full-service universal bank and the third largest corporation in the Nordic region and one of the top 10 financial services companies in Europe based on market capitalisation. We are present in 17 countries, including our four Nordic home markets which together constitute the 10th largest economy in the world. As demand for digital services increases, we're continuously working to become your future digital bank by improving the products and services we offer, such as new online banking platforms, mobile payments and analytics tools, to name a few. The Nordea share is listed on the Nasdaq Helsinki, Nasdaq Copenhagen and Nasdaq Stockholm exchanges. Read more about us at nordea.com. We value your opinions and welcome your comments and questions on our posts here on LinkedIn. Please note that we reply mainly during business hours, Monday-Friday. Please keep a polite, professional and constructive tone. We remove comments containing crude language and derogatory views of our staff and other people who comment on our posts. We do not allow content that is unrelated to the subject, and we remove discriminatory and racist comments as well as spam and advertising.

NAICS: 52211
NAICS Definition: Commercial Banking
Employees: 29,747
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

CIB Egypt

21/23 Charles De Gaulle Giza. P.O. Box 2430 Cairo, Egypt., Giza, undefined, 11213, EG
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799

Commercial International Bank was established in 1975 as a joint venture between the National Bank of Egypt (NBE, 51%) and the Chase Manhattan Bank (49%) under the name "Chase National Bank of Egypt”. Following Chase's decision to divest its equity stake in 1987, NBE increased its shareholding to 99.9%, changing the Bank’s name to Commercial International Bank (Egypt) S.A.E. NBE’s stake gradually decreased through several public offerings till reaching 18.7%. In 2006, a Consortium led by Ripplewood Holdings acquired NBE stake. In July 2009, Actis, a leading emerging markets private equity firm, invested US$ 244 million to get shares in CIB, acquiring hence 50% of the Ripplewood Holdings Consortium’s stake. Five months later, Ripplewood sold its remaining 4.7% stake over the open market, marking the successful transition of strategic partnership to be with Actis, who then became CIB’s largest shareholder with a 9.1% stake. In March 2014,Actis sold a portion of its holding, representing 2.6% of the Bank’s total outstanding shares, in the open market to a group of international investors. In May 2014, Actis, successfully realised its investment in CIB and sold its remaining 6.5% to Subsidiaries wholly owned by Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd “Fairfax”. CIB is Egypt’s leading private sector bank, offering a broad range of financial products and services to its customers, including enterprises of all sizes, institutions, households and high-net worth individuals. CIB strives to provide superior financial solutions to meet all customers’ needs. Having the strongest brand equity rightfully places CIB as the bank of choice for over 500 of Egypt’s largest corporations. CIB shows tremendous potential within the bourgeoning Retail and SME Banking markets. Through its superior management, high-operating standards, corporate governance best practices and training programs,CIB has succeeded in becoming the most profitable commercial bank operating in Egypt for more than 40 years.

NAICS: 522
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 15,324
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nordea.jpeg
Nordea
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cibegypt.jpeg
CIB Egypt
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Nordea
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
CIB Egypt
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Banking Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Nordea in 2025.

Incidents vs Banking Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CIB Egypt in 2025.

Incident History — Nordea (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Nordea cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — CIB Egypt (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CIB Egypt cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nordea.jpeg
Nordea
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cibegypt.jpeg
CIB Egypt
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Nordea company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to CIB Egypt company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, CIB Egypt company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Nordea company.

In the current year, CIB Egypt company and Nordea company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither CIB Egypt company nor Nordea company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither CIB Egypt company nor Nordea company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither CIB Egypt company nor Nordea company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Nordea company nor CIB Egypt company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Nordea nor CIB Egypt holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Nordea company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to CIB Egypt company.

Nordea company employs more people globally than CIB Egypt company, reflecting its scale as a Banking.

Neither Nordea nor CIB Egypt holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Nordea nor CIB Egypt holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Nordea nor CIB Egypt holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Nordea nor CIB Egypt holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Nordea nor CIB Egypt holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Nordea nor CIB Egypt holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: 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: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
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N