Comparison Overview
repsol

repsol
Méndez Álvaro, 44, Madrid, Madrid, ES, 28045
Last Update: 02/04/2026
What do you do with the energy that drives you every day? We strive to turn it into something useful for you—your decisions and your next steps. We are a company that explores multi-energy solutions through innovation, technology, and the curiosity of our team. With ove...

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited
Mumbai, IN
Last Update: 03/04/2026
Fortune Global 500 Company, Bharat Petroleum is the second largest Indian Oil Marketing Company and one of the premier integrated energy companies in India, engaged in refining of crude oil and marketing of petroleum products, with a significant presence in the upstream...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

repsol







Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for repsol in 2026.
Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited in 2026.
Incident History - repsol (X = Date, Y = Severity)
repsol cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

repsol

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
The GOOSE subscriber component improperly validates the UTC timestamp field in unauthenticated IEC 61850 GOOSE (EtherType 0x88B8) Layer-2 multicast messages. A specially crafted GOOSE frame containing an undersized timestamp field can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read during message processing, causing the process to crash and resulting in a denial-of-service condition.
OpenClaw Dashboard contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the administrator's browser session by injecting HTML markup into agent transcript messages processed through the sessions API. Attackers can craft a message containing inline event handler payloads such as an img tag with an onerror attribute within the 60-character rendering budget, which is stored in the session transcript and interpolated unsanitized into innerHTML on the default landing page, allowing theft of session tokens and unauthorized calls to authenticated administrative endpoints including agent instruction file modification.
MeshCentral 1.1.21 contains a cross-site WebSocket hijacking protection bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to hijack authenticated administrator sessions by exploiting an unconditional early return in the CheckWebServerOriginName() function within webserver.js when self-signed certificates are in use. Attackers can open cross-origin WebSocket connections to any of the twelve WebSocket endpoints, send crafted action commands to exfiltrate the server sessionKey used to sign session cookies, forge session tokens as arbitrary users, and gain full remote control of all managed devices governed by the MeshCentral instance.
The GOOSE parser contains an off-by-one boundary-handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer-2 multicast frame on the process bus. When specific GOOSE message fields are processed, the parser advances its internal buffer position incorrectly, resulting in a heap out-of-bounds read. On affected platforms, this condition reliably terminates the subscriber process and causes a denial-of-service.
The GOOSE payload parser contains a boundary handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer 2 multicast frame on the process bus. When processing specific payload fields, an attacker controlled inner element length may exceed its enclosing length, causing the parser to over read by one byte. This out-of-bounds read reliably terminates the subscriber process, resulting in a denial-of-service condition.