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

Obot AI Vendor Cyber Rating & Cyber Score

obot.ai

MCPs are becoming the backbone of AI integration. Without a control layer, organizations risk shadow infrastructure, data leaks, and lost productivity. Obot's MCP Gateway helps enterprises accelerate adoption and stay in control - before the chaos spreads.


Obot AI A.I CyberSecurity Scoring

Obot AI
Company Information
Website:http://www.obot.ai
Employees number:18
Number of followers:2,030
NAICS:5112
Industry Type:Software Development
Homepage:obot.ai
Obot AI Risk Score (AI oriented)
Between 650 and 699
logo
Obot AISoftware Development
Updated:
27/05/2026
695/1000
Weak
B
AaaAaABaaBaBCaaCaC
Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
Insurance prefers TPRM score to calculate premium
Obot AI Global Score (TPRM)
xxxx
logo
Obot AISoftware Development
•••
Score locked
Instant access to detailed risk factors
Vulnerabilities
Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
Findings

Obot AI
Obot AIWeak
Current Score
695B (WEAK)
01000
2 incidents
-5 avg impact
Incident timeline with MITRE ATT&CK tactics, techniques, and mitigations.
JULY 2026
696Before Incident
JUNE 2026
696Before Incident
MAY 2026
700Before Incident
Vulnerability
27 May 2026Obot AI
vLLM, FastAPI and Model Context Protocol: BadHost Vulnerability Exposes Sensitive AI Agent Server Endpoints to Attackers

Critical 'BadHost' Vulnerability in Starlette Exposes AI Applications to Unauthorized Access

695After Incident
CRITICAL-5
OBOVLLFAS1779892255
Critical "BadHost" Vulnerability in Starlette Exposes AI Applications to Unauthorized Access A severe security flaw, CVE-2026-48710 (BadHost), has been discovered in the Starlette web framework, putting thousands of AI-powered applications and API services at risk of exploitation. Identified by X41 D-Sec during an OSTIF-sponsored audit, the vulnerability allows attackers to manipulate HTTP request processing, potentially bypassing authentication and accessing restricted endpoints. The issue stems from improper sanitization of the HTTP Host header in earlier Starlette versions. By crafting malicious requests, attackers can alter the `request.url` object, tricking applications into misclassifying protected routes as legitimate. This enables the bypass of path-based authentication middleware, a common security measure in AI infrastructure, without requiring valid credentials. The impact is widespread, affecting FastAPI-based services, inference servers (vLLM, LiteLLM), Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, OpenAI-compatible APIs, and custom AI frameworks. Many AI deployments rely on URL path validation for access control, making them particularly vulnerable. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized access to AI models, data exfiltration, or abuse of compute resources. Security researchers warn that exploitation is straightforward and does not require authentication, increasing the risk. Attackers could expose hidden endpoints, facilitate lateral movement in poorly segmented AI environments, or compromise sensitive data. A patch has been released in Starlette 1.0.1, and additional mitigations include strict Host header validation at the application and proxy levels and avoiding sole reliance on path-based access controls. Automated scanning tools, such as Nemesis, can help identify vulnerable deployments. The vulnerability highlights the growing security risks at the intersection of web frameworks and AI infrastructure, emphasizing the need for proactive patching and robust input validation as AI systems scale.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Vulnerability Exploitation
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Sensitive data, AI modelsSystems Affected: AI-powered applications, API services, inference servers (vLLM, LiteLLM), Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, OpenAI-compatible APIs, custom AI frameworksOperational Impact: Unauthorized access to AI models, data exfiltration, abuse of compute resources
DATA BREACH
Type Of Data Compromised: AI models, sensitive dataSensitivity Of Data: HighData Exfiltration: Possible
APRIL 2026
699Before Incident
MARCH 2026
698Before Incident
FEBRUARY 2026
697Before Incident
JANUARY 2026
696Before Incident
DECEMBER 2025
695Before Incident
NOVEMBER 2025
693Before Incident
OCTOBER 2025
692Before Incident
SEPTEMBER 2025
691Before Incident
AUGUST 2025
690Before Incident
JUNE 2025
750Before Incident
Breach
01 Jun 2025Obot AI
Organizations with exposed MCP servers: 1,800+ MCP servers exposed without authentication: How zero trust can secure the AI agent revolution

Exposed AI Servers and Zero-Click Exploits: A Cybersecurity Crisis Unfolds

686After Incident
CRITICAL-64
OBO1778495141
Exposed AI Servers and Zero-Click Exploits: A Cybersecurity Crisis Unfolds In a stark revelation last summer, Knostic security researchers uncovered 1,862 publicly exposed MCP (Multi-Tool Chain Protocol) servers, leaving organizations’ AI infrastructure alarmingly vulnerable. A manual review of 119 servers confirmed a disturbing reality: every single instance allowed unauthenticated access to internal tool inventories effectively broadcasting AI capabilities to anyone with the means to look. Far from being abandoned test environments, these were production systems with write access to critical assets, including financial databases, social media accounts, and CRM platforms. The threat escalated in June 2025 when Aim Security disclosed EchoLeak (CVE-2025-32711), a zero-click exploit targeting Microsoft 365 Copilot. Attackers embed malicious prompts in overlooked document elements speaker notes, hidden comments, or metadata exploiting Copilot’s automated processing to silently exfiltrate sensitive data to attacker-controlled servers. The attack requires no user interaction, leaving victims unaware of the breach. This marks a dangerous evolution in AI-driven cyber threats, where even routine business documents become vectors for undetected compromise.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Data ExposureZero-Click Exploit
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Sensitive data (financial databases, social media accounts, CRM platforms, internal tool inventories)AI infrastructureMicrosoft 365 Copilot
DATA BREACH
Financial databasesSocial media accountsCRM platformsInternal tool inventoriesSensitivity Of Data: HighData Exfiltration: Yes (via EchoLeak exploit)Documents (with hidden metadata, speaker notes, comments)

Frequently Asked Questions

?
What is the current A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score for Obot AI ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in June 2026 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in May 2026 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in April 2026 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in March 2026 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in February 2026 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in January 2026 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in December 2025 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in November 2025 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in October 2025 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in September 2025 ?
?
What was Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in August 2025 ?
?
What is the average per-incident point impact on Obot AI's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score over the past 12 months ?
?
Where can I access detailed records of all cyber incidents associated with Obot AI ?
?
Where can I find a summary of the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
?
Where can I view Obot AI's profile page on Rankiteo ?
?
How accurate is the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?