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

Comparison Overview

Proximus NXT LuxembourgProximus NXT Luxembourg
VS
Hexaware TechnologiesHexaware Technologies
Proximus NXT Luxembourg

Proximus NXT Luxembourg

18, Rue du Puits Romain, Bertrange, Luxembourg, LU, 8070

Last Update: 10/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.proximusnxt.lu/
752/1000Fair

Proximus NXT Luxembourg is the new name for our activities on the professional market for medium and large companies. The world is changing rapidly, companies have to deal with huge amounts of data to manage, store and analyze. The emergence of technologies such as arti...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:173
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Hexaware Technologies

Hexaware Technologies

#1, Sector III, Millennium Business Park,, 'A'​ Block , TTC Industrial Estate, Mahape,, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, IN, 400710

Last Update: 17/08/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.hexaware.com
765/1000Fair

At Hexaware, we're not just a global technology and business process services company; we're a community of 31,600+ Hexawarians dedicated to one singular purpose: creating smiles through the power of great people and technology. With a presence in 58 offices across 28 c...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:36,701
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Proximus NXT Luxembourg

Proximus NXT Luxembourg

-
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
Hexaware Technologies

Hexaware Technologies

-
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 Proximus NXT Luxembourg in 2026.

Incidents

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

Hexaware Technologies has 1.96% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Proximus NXT Luxembourg (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Proximus NXT Luxembourg 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 - Hexaware Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hexaware Technologies 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...
Proximus NXT Luxembourg

Proximus NXT Luxembourg

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Hexaware Technologies

Hexaware Technologies

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
HCLTAT1786448292

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-89096
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in nfs-utils. An unauthenticated remote attacker can trigger a Denial of Service (DoS) by sending repeated state notification requests to an exposed rpc.statd service. The service fails to properly release memory allocated during callback processing, leading to continuous memory growth. Sustained requests can exhaust system resources, eventually causing the service to degrade or crash.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-89088
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in parted. A heap-based buffer overflow exists in libparted's file system resizing logic when handling FAT16 volumes. By convincing a user or administrator to resize a specially crafted FAT16 file system image with malformed directory metadata, an attacker can trigger an oversized read into a fixed-size memory buffer. This issue causes memory corruption, resulting in an application crash and a denial of service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-89085
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in parted. A heap-based buffer overflow can occur when processing a specially crafted FAT32 filesystem due to an integer calculation error during buffer allocation. A local attacker could exploit this by enticing a user or automated service to open a malicious filesystem image, resulting in an application crash leading to a Denial of Service (DoS) or potential memory corruption.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-17591
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in libarchive. An attacker can cause a Denial of Service (DoS) or potential information disclosure due to a use-after-free vulnerability, which occurs when a program reads memory that has already been released. This issue arises when the archive_entry_copy_mac_metadata() function deallocates an internal buffer before completing a data copy. An attacker who can supply input to an application utilizing this function can trigger the flaw to crash the application or read uninitialized memory data.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1
CVE-2026-111802
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Nautilus. When a removable drive or disk image is unmounted or ejected, Nautilus prompts the user to empty the trash without verifying whether the trash directory paths are symbolic links. An attacker can exploit this flaw by tricking a user into mounting a crafted storage volume and confirming the prompt to empty the trash, leading to the arbitrary deletion of files accessible to that user.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.3