Comparison Overview

Old Mutual

VS

Transamerica

Old Mutual

107 Rivonia Rd, Johannesburg, Gauteng, undefined, ZA
Last Update: 2025-12-09
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:
Employees: 12,699
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Transamerica

undefined, Baltimore, Maryland, 21202, US
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 700 and 749

Longer lifespans are changing the way we exist. Instead of the traditional stages of learn, work, and retire, we now have the potential for a more fulfilling, multi-stage life. With this opportunity comes the need to plan for it. We enable financial professionals, brokers, agents, advisors, and employers to energize clients and employees to seize the possibilities longevity brings. So, no matter where someone is on their journey, we can help them pursue the freedom to live the life they want. Transamerica. Live your best life. Securities distributed by Transamerica Capital, Inc. Social terms: https://www.transamerica.com/social-media-guidelines

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 15,361
Subsidiaries: 23
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
2

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/transamerica.jpeg
Transamerica
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
Transamerica
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 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Transamerica in 2025.

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

Old Mutual cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Transamerica 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/transamerica.jpeg
Transamerica
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2023
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Exploitation of Vulnerability
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2018
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Email
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Transamerica company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Old Mutual company has not reported any.

In the current year, Transamerica company and Old Mutual company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Transamerica company nor Old Mutual company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Transamerica company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Old Mutual company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Transamerica company nor Old Mutual company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Transamerica company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Old Mutual company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Old Mutual nor Transamerica holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Transamerica company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Old Mutual company.

Transamerica company employs more people globally than Old Mutual company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither Old Mutual nor Transamerica holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor Transamerica holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor Transamerica holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor Transamerica holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor Transamerica holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Old Mutual nor Transamerica 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