Comparison Overview

New York Life Investments

VS

Aon

New York Life Investments

51 Madison Avenue, None, New York, NY, US, 10010
Last Update: 2025-11-23

New York Life Investments is comprised of the global asset management businesses of our parent company, New York Life Insurance Company. We offer clients access to specialized investment teams through our family of affiliated boutiques. Disclosure and guidelines: https://www.newyorklifeinvestments.com/info/social-media-policy

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 949
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Aon

122 Leadenhall Street, London, undefined, EC3V 4AN, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

We exist to shape decisions for the better — to protect and enrich the lives of people around the world. Through actionable analytic insight, globally integrated Risk Capital and Human Capital expertise, and locally relevant solutions, our colleagues provide clients in over 120 countries with the clarity and confidence to make better risk and people decisions that help protect and grow their businesses.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 75,543
Subsidiaries: 11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nylinvestments.jpeg
New York Life Investments
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/aon.jpeg
Aon
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
New York Life Investments
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Aon
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for New York Life Investments in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Aon in 2025.

Incident History — New York Life Investments (X = Date, Y = Severity)

New York Life Investments cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Aon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nylinvestments.jpeg
New York Life Investments
Incidents

Date Detected: 2/2024
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Malware
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aon.jpeg
Aon
Incidents

Date Detected: 07/2023
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: SQL Injection
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 02/2022
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Hacking
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Aon company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to New York Life Investments company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Aon company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to New York Life Investments company.

In the current year, Aon company and New York Life Investments company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Aon company nor New York Life Investments company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Aon company has disclosed at least one data breach, while New York Life Investments company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Aon company and New York Life Investments company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither New York Life Investments company nor Aon company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither New York Life Investments nor Aon holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Aon company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to New York Life Investments company.

Aon company employs more people globally than New York Life Investments company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither New York Life Investments nor Aon holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither New York Life Investments nor Aon holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither New York Life Investments nor Aon holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither New York Life Investments nor Aon holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither New York Life Investments nor Aon holds HIPAA certification.

Neither New York Life Investments nor Aon holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: 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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H