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

Comparison Overview

Reputation Defender by NortonReputation Defender by Norton
VS
RP Sanjiv Goenka GroupRP Sanjiv Goenka Group
Reputation Defender by Norton

Reputation Defender by Norton

Tempe, US

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
771/1000Fair

Reputation Defender is the leader in the online reputation management and digital privacy space. Founded in 2006, we pioneered the industry—and we remain the largest, most trusted company within it. Part of Gen Digital Inc., a global leader in consumer Cyber Safety wi...

NAICS:81
NAICS Definition:Other Services (except Public Administration)
Employees:42
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
RP Sanjiv Goenka Group

RP Sanjiv Goenka Group

Kolkata, IN

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.rpsg.in
798/1000Fair

The RPSG Group is one of India's fastest growing conglomerates with a significant global presence. The Group's businesses include power and energy, carbon black manufacturing, retail, IT-enabled services, FMCG, media and entertainment, and agriculture. In the last few ...

NAICS:81
NAICS Definition:Other Services (except Public Administration)
Employees:33,866
Subsidiaries:20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Reputation Defender by Norton

Reputation Defender by Norton

-
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
RP Sanjiv Goenka Group

RP Sanjiv Goenka Group

-
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 Consumer Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Reputation Defender by Norton in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Consumer Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for RP Sanjiv Goenka Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Reputation Defender by Norton (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Reputation Defender by Norton cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - RP Sanjiv Goenka Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

RP Sanjiv Goenka Group 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...
Reputation Defender by Norton

Reputation Defender by Norton

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
RP Sanjiv Goenka Group

RP Sanjiv Goenka Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-49416
SUMMARY

The CONS_HISTORY ioctl handler did not adequately validate the requested history size. A large value caused an integer overflow in the buffer size calculation, resulting in a heap allocation smaller than expected. Subsequent initialization of the buffer wrote beyond the end of the allocation. An unprivileged local user with access to a vt(4) device can trigger an out-of-bounds write in the kernel, potentially escalating privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49414
SUMMARY

The ELF image activator cleared per-process ASLR preference flags for setuid binaries after the code that computes the PIE base address, rather than before. As a result, a user-requested ASLR disable was still in effect at the point where the base address was chosen. An unprivileged local user can disable ASLR for a setuid PIE binary by calling procctl(2) before execve(2). This makes exploitation of any separate memory corruption vulnerability in that binary significantly easier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49417
SUMMARY

Second, the audio buffer backing a mapping could be freed when the device was closed even though the mapping remained valid. The freed memory could then be reused elsewhere while still accessible through the stale mapping. The /dev/dsp device nodes are world-accessible by default. On a system with an audio device, either issue allows an unprivileged local user to read and write kernel memory, which can be used to escalate privileges, potentially gaining full control of the affected system. At a minimum, an attacker can crash the kernel, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49413
SUMMARY

The Linuxulator determined whether a binary was set-user-ID or set-group-ID by checking the P_SUGID process flag. During execve(2), this flag is not yet set at the point where the auxiliary vector is constructed, so AT_SECURE was incorrectly set to zero for set-user-ID and set-group-ID executables. An unprivileged local user can inject a shared library via LD_PRELOAD into a set-user-ID or set-group-ID Linux binary, gaining the privileges of that binary.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49412
SUMMARY

The kernel handler for IPV6_MSFILTER dropped a serializing lock in order to copy the source-filter list from userspace, then reacquired the lock. During this window another thread could free the multicast filter structure, leaving the handler with a stale pointer to freed memory. An unprivileged local user can exploit this use-after-free to escalate privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA