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

Comparison Overview

PwC MéxicoPwC México
VS
AyesaAyesa
PwC México

PwC México

Calzada General Mariano Escobedo 573, Miguel Hidalgo, 11590, MX

Last Update: 25/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.pwc.com/mx/
761/1000Fair

Generamos confianza en la sociedad y resolvemos problemas importantes. Contamos con un equipo de más de 4,000 profesionales en México y oficinas en diversos estados del país.

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:1,885
Subsidiaries:79
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Ayesa

Ayesa

Parque Científico Tecnológico Cartuja, Sevilla, Andalucía 41092, ES, Sevilla, Sevilla, ES

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.ayesa.com
783/1000Fair

Ayesa is a global provider of technology and engineering services with more than 11500 employees in twenty-three countries across Europe, Latin America, Africa and Asia. The company develops and implements digital solutions for the private and public sector and uses the...

NAICS:5416
NAICS Definition:Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services
Employees:11,917
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
PwC México

PwC México

-
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
Ayesa

Ayesa

-
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 Business Consulting and Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PwC México in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Ayesa in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - PwC México (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PwC México cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Ayesa 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...
PwC México

PwC México

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Ayesa

Ayesa

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-19756
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in Dromara lamp-cloud up to 5.10.0. This affects an unknown part of the file DefGenProjectController.java of the component Code Generator. Such manipulation of the argument outputDir/parent/projectPrefix leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
2.8
CVE-2026-19753
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Model Context Protocol mcp-rdf-explorer 1.0.0. Affected is the function explore_url of the file src/mcp-rdf-explorer/server.py of the component MCP Server. Performing a manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
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-2026-73843
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.2 and 1.1.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go served caller-facing management APIs on the externally reachable agent listener without authentication, allowing network-reachable attackers to invoke /api/proxy/ and /api/exec/ operations, proxy the data-plane Kubernetes API, and execute commands in workload pods in multi-cluster deployments. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.2 and 1.1.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-73842
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go exposed /api/proxy/, /api/exec/, and /api/wirelogs/ on an internal listener without requiring a client certificate or token, allowing any network-reachable caller to read tenant Kubernetes Secrets, mutate workloads, and execute commands across connected data planes. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-73841
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. From 1.2.0-rc.1 until 1.2.0, internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/exec.go and internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/wirelogs.go authorize component:exec and wirelogs:view using the caller-supplied project query parameter instead of comp.Spec.Owner.ProjectName, allowing a user with a project-scoped grant to execute commands in and read wirelogs from components owned by other projects in the same namespace. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8