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

Comparison Overview

PacteraPactera
VS
Tata Consultancy ServicesTata Consultancy Services
Pactera

Pactera

undefined, Beijing, undefined, undefined, CN

Last Update: 23/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://en.pactera.com
768/1000Fair

Leading The World Through Digital Technology, Creating Value With Industry-Targeted Services Accelerate Digital Transformation For Each Our Clients Through Leading-Edge Ideas And Nimble Execution.

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:7,143
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Tata Consultancy Services

Tata Consultancy Services

Tata Consultancy Services, TCS House, Raveline Street, 21 DS Marg, Fort, Mumbai, Maharashtra, IN, 400001

Last Update: 07/05/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.tcs.com/
821/1000Good

Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) is an IT services, consulting, and business solutions organization that has been partnering with many of the world’s largest businesses in their transformation journeys since its inception in 1968. Our consulting led, innovation-driven se...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:692,561
Subsidiaries:52
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Pactera

Pactera

-
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
Tata Consultancy Services

Tata Consultancy Services

-
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 IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Pactera in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tata Consultancy Services in 2026.

Incidents

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

Pactera 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 - Tata Consultancy Services (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tata Consultancy Services cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Pactera

Pactera

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Tata Consultancy Services

Tata Consultancy Services

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-56355
SUMMARY

GNU Savannah Administration Savane through 3.17 uses untrusted data as part of authorization.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-20
UPDATED
Date2026-06-20
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:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-56347
SUMMARY

AVideo TopMenu plugin through version 26.0 contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in menu item rendering due to missing output encoding of icon classes, URLs, and text labels. Attackers can inject malicious JavaScript through unescaped menu item fields that execute for all site visitors, potentially stealing session cookies or performing unauthorized actions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-20
UPDATED
Date2026-06-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56346
SUMMARY

AVideo through version 25.0 contains an authentication bypass vulnerability in the decryptMessage.json.php endpoint that allows unauthenticated users to decrypt PGP messages. Remote attackers can submit private keys, ciphertext, and passphrases to perform server-side decryption without credentials, exposing key material to logs and enabling resource exhaustion attacks.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-20
UPDATED
Date2026-06-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-56345
SUMMARY

AVideo through 29.0 contains an authorization bypass vulnerability in the Meet plugin's uploadRecordedVideo.json.php endpoint that derives the target users_id from the uploaded filename without verification. An attacker with knowledge of the Meet shared secret can craft a malicious file upload with a filename containing an arbitrary users_id to invoke passwordless User->login() and establish an authenticated session as any user including admin. Attackers can obtain the Meet shared secret through path-traversal vulnerabilities or timing attacks against checkToken.json.php, then POST a crafted file to uploadRecordedVideo.json.php with a filename like '1-anything.mp4' to hijack admin sessions and gain full account takeover.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-20
UPDATED
Date2026-06-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-56342
SUMMARY

AVideo through version 27.0 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability in plugin/Live/test.php that allows authenticated administrators to read arbitrary URLs via the statsURL parameter, which lacks isSSRFSafeURL() validation and accepts requests to private IP ranges and cloud metadata endpoints. Attackers can exploit this by crafting requests to internal services, cloud metadata endpoints like 169.254.169.254, and localhost to retrieve sensitive information including IAM credentials, internal service responses, and network configuration details.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-20
UPDATED
Date2026-06-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3