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

Comparison Overview

Optics for Solar Energy at HZBOptics for Solar Energy at HZB
VS
Technical University of MunichTechnical University of Munich
Optics for Solar Energy at HZB

Optics for Solar Energy at HZB

Berlin, DE

Last Update: 04/12/2025

View Profile

NAICS:5417
NAICS Definition:Scientific Research and Development Services
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:19
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Technical University of Munich

Technical University of Munich

Arcisstraße 21, München, Munich, Bavaria, DE, 80333

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.tum.de/
781/1000Fair

Our university combines top-class facilities for cutting-edge research with unique learning opportunities for 52,000 students. Whether our researchers are investigating the origins of life, matter and the universe or looking for solutions to the major challenges for our...

NAICS:5417
NAICS Definition:Scientific Research and Development Services
Employees:11,505
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Optics for Solar Energy at HZB

Optics for Solar Energy at HZB

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Technical University of Munich

Technical University of Munich

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Research Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Optics for Solar Energy at HZB in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Research Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Technical University of Munich in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Optics for Solar Energy at HZB (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Optics for Solar Energy at HZB cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Technical University of Munich (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Technical University of Munich cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Optics for Solar Energy at HZB

Optics for Solar Energy at HZB

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Technical University of Munich

Technical University of Munich

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB company and Technical University of Munich company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB and Technical University of Munich, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB and Technical University of Munich, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Optics for Solar Energy at HZB or Technical University of Munich ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Optics for Solar Energy at HZB or Technical University of Munich ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB and Technical University of Munich, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Optics for Solar Energy at HZB and Technical University of Munich, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-58281
SUMMARY

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-10660
SUMMARY

The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-61870
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.4
CVE-2026-61861
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-61858
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8