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

Comparison Overview

OYAKOYAK
VS
PT. PegadaianPT. Pegadaian
OYAK

OYAK

Eti Mahallesi, Gazi Mustafa Kemal Bulvarı. No:138, Ankara, 06570, TR

Last Update: 16/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.oyak.com.tr
767/1000Fair

1961 yılında kurulan OYAK, Türkiye’nin en büyük tamamlayıcı mesleki emeklilik fonudur. OYAK; maden metalürjiden çimentoya, betona ve kâğıda; otomotivden lojistiğe, kimya ve tarımdan enerjiye, finanstan gıdaya kadar birçok sektörde; altı farklı kıtada, 21 ülkede faaliy...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:3,788
Subsidiaries:29
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
PT. Pegadaian

PT. Pegadaian

Jl. Kramat Raya 162, Jakarta Pusat, 10430, ID

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.pegadaian.co.id
784/1000Fair

PT Pegadaian didirikan di kota Sukabumi, Jawa Barat pada 1 April 1901. Tak hanya bergerak di Industri Gadai, Pegadaian juga memiliki ragam produk dan layanan seperti investasi berbasis emas yang dapat dimiliki oleh masyarakat dengan cara yang mudah, diantaranya Tabunga...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:12,062
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
OYAK

OYAK

-
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
PT. Pegadaian

PT. Pegadaian

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for OYAK in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PT. Pegadaian in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - OYAK (X = Date, Y = Severity)

OYAK cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - PT. Pegadaian (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PT. Pegadaian 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...
OYAK

OYAK

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
PT. Pegadaian

PT. Pegadaian

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-81203
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Simple Online Food Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=login2. The manipulation of the argument email leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-80158
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in the ipa_getkeytab module of the community.general Ansible collection. The module's bind_pw parameter, used to supply the LDAP simple-bind password when retrieving a Kerberos keytab, is not declared with no_log, unlike the sibling password parameter in the same module. As a consequence, the supplied IPA/LDAP bind password is recorded in cleartext in the managed host's system journal/syslog (the module's "Invoked with" record), is included in the module's return values and verbose (-v) output, and is displayed in Automation Controller / AWX job output. The password is additionally passed on the command line to the ipa-getkeytab helper (as --bindpw <value>), exposing it in the process list to local users while the command runs. An attacker able to read these logs, job output, or the process table can obtain the directory bind credential, potentially compromising the accounts and objects that credential can access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-75340
SUMMARY

The device metadata import interface /device/instance/{productId}/property-metadata/import of jetlinks community 2.11 is vulnerable to Server-side request forgery (SSRF).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75338
SUMMARY

disconf (Distributed Configuration Management Platform) 2.6.36 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control. The config-fetching APIs /api/config/item, /api/config/file, /api/config/list and /api/config/simple/list are exposed without authentication. The LoginInterceptor explicitly whitelists these four paths, so any anonymous attacker can read every configuration item and configuration file managed by the config center.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75336
SUMMARY

Funiture 1.0.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the backend tool interfaces /sys/tool/select.json and /sys/tool/update.json.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA