Comparison Overview
Risika

Risika
Danneskiold-Samsøes Allé 41, Copenhagen, 1434, DK
Last Update: 29/03/2026
In 2017 a small group of FinTech nerds from Copenhagen hatched a vision to challenge the faceless and old-school status quo within the exotic industry of financial risk management. We leverage machine learning to help companies predict paying and non-paying customers, w...

Tata Capital
Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Mumbai, 400013, IN
Last Update: 01/04/2026
Tata Capital Limited is a subsidiary of Tata Sons Limited. The Company is registered with the Reserve Bank of India as a Core Investment Company and offers through itself and its subsidiaries fund and fee-based financial services to its customers, under the Tata Capital...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Risika







Tata Capital






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Risika in 2026.
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Tata Capital in 2026.
Incident History - Risika (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Risika cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Tata Capital (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Tata Capital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Risika

Tata Capital
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the Alarm/Conditions wrapper when processing PublishResponse EventNotificationList data
- https://github.com/gff-cw/information/issues/18
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/S2OPC_Toolkit_1.7.3/src/ClientServer/address_space/sopc_event_manager.c
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/S2OPC_Toolkit_1.7.3/src/ClientServer/frontend/client_wrapper/alarm_conditions/libs2opc_client_alarm_conditions.c
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/S2OPC_Toolkit_1.7.3/src/ClientServer/frontend/client_wrapper/internal/state_machine.c
- https://gitlab.com/systerel/S2OPC/-/work_items/1781
Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path
- https://github.com/gff-cw/information/issues/16
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/master/samples/ClientServer/client_wrapper/examples/subscribe.c
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/master/src/ClientServer/frontend/client_wrapper/internal/state_machine.c
- https://gitlab.com/systerel/S2OPC/-/work_items/1780
In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.
H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.
H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.