Comparison Overview

Revolut

VS

CIMB

Revolut

7 Westferry Circus, London, England, E14 4HD, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

People deserve more from their money. More visibility, more control, and more freedom. Since 2015, Revolut has been on a mission to deliver just that. Our powerhouse of products help our 50+ million customers get more from their money every day. As we continue our lightning-fast growth,‌ 2 things are essential to our success: our people and our culture. In recognition of our outstanding employee experience, we've been certified as a Great Place to Work™. So far, we have 10,000+ people working around the world, from our offices and remotely, to help us achieve our mission. And we're looking for more brilliant people. People who love building great products, redefining success, and turning the complexity of a chaotic world into the simplicity of a beautiful solution.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 17,316
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

CIMB

Menara CIMB, Kuala Lumpur Sentral, Kuala Lumpur, MY, 50470
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 750 and 799

CIMB Group is a leading ASEAN universal bank, one of the largest Asian investment banks and one of the world's largest Islamic banks. We are headquartered in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and offer consumer banking, commercial banking, wholesale banking, Islamic banking, and asset management products and services. As the fifth largest banking group in ASEAN, we have over 36,000 staff in 16 locations across ASEAN, Asia and beyond. CIMB Bank and CIMB Islamic Bank are members of PIDM.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 13,774
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/revolut.jpeg
Revolut
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cimbmalaysia.jpeg
CIMB
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Revolut
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
CIMB
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Revolut in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CIMB in 2025.

Incident History — Revolut (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Revolut cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — CIMB (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CIMB cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/revolut.jpeg
Revolut
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2022
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 09/2022
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cimbmalaysia.jpeg
CIMB
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

CIMB company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Revolut company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Revolut company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas CIMB company has not reported any.

In the current year, CIMB company and Revolut company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither CIMB company nor Revolut company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Revolut company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other CIMB company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Revolut company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while CIMB company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Revolut company nor CIMB company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Revolut nor CIMB holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

CIMB company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Revolut company.

Revolut company employs more people globally than CIMB company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither Revolut nor CIMB holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Revolut nor CIMB holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Revolut nor CIMB holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Revolut nor CIMB holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Revolut nor CIMB holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Revolut nor CIMB holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H