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

Comparison Overview

PGIM, Private CreditPGIM, Private Credit
VS
BNYBNY
PGIM, Private Credit

PGIM, Private Credit

655 Broad St, Newark, 07102, US

Last Update: 20/04/2026

View Profile
758/1000Fair

PGIM, the global asset management business of Prudential Financial, Inc. (NYSE: PRU) is built on a 150-year legacy of strength, stability, and disciplined risk management through more than 30 market cycles. For nearly a century, PGIM's private credit platform has partn...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
BNY

BNY

240 Greenwich St, New York, NY, US, 10286

Last Update: 21/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.bny.com
765/1000Fair

BNY is a global financial services platforms company at the heart of the world’s capital markets. For more than 240 years BNY has partnered alongside clients, using its expertise and platforms to help them operate more efficiently and accelerate growth. Today BNY serve...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:54,893
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
PGIM, Private Credit

PGIM, Private Credit

-
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
BNY

BNY

-
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 PGIM, Private Credit in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

BNY has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - PGIM, Private Credit (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PGIM, Private Credit cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

BNY 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...
PGIM, Private Credit

PGIM, Private Credit

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
BNY

BNY

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
BNY1776199205

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-113705
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in a2aproject a2a-rs up to 0.4.3. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file a2a-server/src/error.rs. Executing a manipulation can lead to information exposure through error message. The attack can be executed remotely. This patch is called 713b943af94ab2d521d483b841618b97a2e78a4d. A patch should be applied to remediate this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
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: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
3.9
CVE-2026-9825
SUMMARY

IBM Cyber Fraud 1.0.0 through 1.0.2 has a missing secure attribute allowing sensitive cookies to be transmitted over unencrypted connections, potentially enabling an attacker to intercept session data through network-based attacks.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
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-2026-94402
SUMMARY

IBM Carbon Charts 0.4.0 through 1.27.19 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. The MeterChart component's Title.truncateTitle() function re-inserts a substring of user-supplied label text into the DOM via an unsanitized innerHTML write when the title exceeds the available container width. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the victim's browser session.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
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
IMPACT SCORE
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-93888
SUMMARY

IBM Sterling Connect Direct for Unix 6.4.0.0 through 6.4.0.6 and 6.3.0.0 through 6.3.0.7 apnotify utility is vulnerable to a code injection due to insufficient validation of user input.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-93744
SUMMARY

IBM i 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6 could allow an unathenticated remote attacker to bypass security restrictions due to improper access control. By sending a specially crafted HTTP request to any URL within the Navigator application prior to authentication, a bad actor could exploit this vulnerability to alter server-side session security state.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
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:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9