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

Comparison Overview

RingGo ParkingRingGo Parking
VS
ZoomZoom
RingGo Parking

RingGo Parking

Maplewood, Basingstoke, RG24 8YB, GB

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.RingGo.co.uk
740/1000Moderate

RingGo is part of Arrive, a leading global mobility platform built on over 70 years of innovation. Supporting nearly 60 million users in 90+ countries, Arrive brings together trusted brands to transform how people move through cities. Since 2005, RingGo has been helpi...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:88
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Zoom

Zoom

55 Almaden Blvd., 6th Floor, San Jose, CA 95113, San Jose, 95113, US

Last Update: 12/08/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.zoom.com
715/1000Moderate

Bring teams together, reimagine workspaces, engage new audiences, and delight your customers –– all on the Zoom AI-first work platform you know and love. 💙 Zoomies help people stay connected so they can get more done together. We set out on a mission to make video com...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:13,856
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
5
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
RingGo Parking

RingGo Parking

-
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
Zoom

Zoom

-
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 RingGo Parking in 2026.

Incidents

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

Zoom has 385.44% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - RingGo Parking (X = Date, Y = Severity)

RingGo Parking cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Zoom 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...
RingGo Parking

RingGo Parking

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
RIN13714822
Zoom

Zoom

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ZOO1786530295
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ZOO1784154237
🔒 Incident : Breach
WORNOTGOOZOONIKTIN1777868873

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
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:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9