Comparison Overview

Old Mutual

VS

S&P Global

Old Mutual

107 Rivonia Rd, Johannesburg, ZA
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 750 and 799

Old Mutual Limited is a listed company on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange and has secondary listings on the London, Malawi, Namibia and Zimbabwe stock exchanges. As a Pan-African financial services company, we are focused on Africa, her needs and her people. Together with you, we have educated our children, given more homes warmth and light, empowered small businesses and improved infrastructure in Africa. Our story will continue #WithAfricaForAfrica.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 12,932
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

S&P Global

55 Water Street, New York, 10041, US
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 800 and 849

S&P Global (NYSE: SPGI) enables businesses, governments, and individuals with trusted data, expertise and technology to make decisions with conviction. We are Advancing Essential Intelligence through world-leading benchmarks, data, and insights that customers need in order to plan confidently, act decisively, and thrive economically in a rapidly changing global landscape. From helping our customers assess new investments across the capital and commodities markets to guiding them through the energy expansion, acceleration of artificial intelligence, and evolution of public and private markets, we enable the world's leading organizations to unlock opportunities, solve challenges, and plan for tomorrow – today. Learn more at www.spglobal.com. Recruitment Fraud Alert: If you receive an email from a https://www.linkedin.com/redir/suspicious-page?url=spglobalind%2ecom domain or any other regionally based domains, it is a scam and should be reported to [email protected]. S&P Global never requires any candidate to pay money for job applications, interviews, offer letters, “pre-employment training” or for equipment/delivery of equipment. Stay informed and protect yourself from recruitment fraud by reviewing our guidelines, fraudulent domains, and how to report suspicious activity here: https://www.spglobal.com/content/dam/spglobal/corporate/en/documents/careers/Corp_0525-Recruitment-Fraud-Alert.pdf

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 41,465
Subsidiaries: 24
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/old-mutual.jpeg
Old Mutual
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/spglobal.jpeg
S&P Global
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
Old Mutual
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
S&P Global
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Old Mutual in 2026.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for S&P Global in 2026.

Incident History — Old Mutual (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Old Mutual cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — S&P Global (X = Date, Y = Severity)

S&P Global cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/old-mutual.jpeg
Old Mutual
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/spglobal.jpeg
S&P Global
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

S&P Global company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Old Mutual company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, S&P Global company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Old Mutual company.

In the current year, S&P Global company and Old Mutual company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither S&P Global company nor Old Mutual company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither S&P Global company nor Old Mutual company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither S&P Global company nor Old Mutual company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Old Mutual company nor S&P Global company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Old Mutual nor S&P Global holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

S&P Global company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Old Mutual company.

S&P Global company employs more people globally than Old Mutual company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither Old Mutual nor S&P Global holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor S&P Global holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor S&P Global holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor S&P Global holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor S&P Global holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor S&P Global holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N