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

Comparison Overview

Roanoke International Brokers LimitedRoanoke International Brokers Limited
VS
AflacAflac
Roanoke International Brokers Limited

Roanoke International Brokers Limited

1 Fen Court, London, England, EC3M 5BN, GB

Last Update: 31/12/2025

View Profile
751/1000Fair

Roanoke International Brokers Limited (RIBL) is a vibrant broker situated within close proximity of Lloyd’s of London. Offering a bespoke, individual service for various Marine and related products which are tailored to suit the needs of our worldwide book of clients. ...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:18
Subsidiaries:24
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Aflac

Aflac

1932 Wynnton Rd, Columbus, 31999, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
https://www.aflac.com
491/1000Critical

Over 50 Million people worldwide have chosen Aflac because of our commitment to providing customers with the confidence that comes from knowing they have assistance in being prepared for whatever life may bring. With Aflac, whether you're a large business or a small o...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:18,043
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
6
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Roanoke International Brokers Limited

Roanoke International Brokers Limited

-
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
Aflac

Aflac

-
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 Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Roanoke International Brokers Limited in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

Aflac has 7.41% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Roanoke International Brokers Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Roanoke International Brokers Limited cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

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

Aflac 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...
Roanoke International Brokers Limited

Roanoke International Brokers Limited

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Aflac

Aflac

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
AFLJAGNUC1768389868
🔒 Incident : Breach
AFL1768391547
🔒 Incident : Breach
AFL2462024101425

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-44541
SUMMARY

Fides is an open-source privacy engineering platform. From version 2.33.0 to before version 2.84.5, there is a DOM-based XSS vulnerability in fides.js via the fides_description override. This issue has been patched in version 2.84.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-08
UPDATED
Date2026-06-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49141
SUMMARY

WACRM prior to commit 73041bf contain an authorization bypass vulnerability in the automation engine that allows authenticated attackers to access and modify contacts belonging to other tenants by supplying an arbitrary caller-controlled contact_id in the POST request body without tenant ownership verification. Attackers can exploit the service-role client that bypasses row-level security to modify victim contact fields including name, email, and company across tenant boundaries using only a known contact UUID.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-08
UPDATED
Date2026-06-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-47345
SUMMARY

Namespace attributes are not encoded correctly during HTML serialization. This allows bypassing the cross-site scripting prevention mechanism of typo3/html-sanitizer before version 2.3.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-08
UPDATED
Date2026-06-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47344
SUMMARY

When ALLOW_INSECURE_RAW_TEXT is enabled, whitespace-variant closing tags (e.g., </style\t>) are not recognized by the sanitizer but accepted by browsers as valid end tags, allowing subsequent content to escape sanitization. This allows bypassing the cross-site scripting prevention mechanism of typo3/html-sanitizer before version 2.3.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-08
UPDATED
Date2026-06-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-46484
SUMMARY

Headplane is a feature-complete Web UI for Headscale. Prior to versions 0.6.3 and 0.7.0-beta.3, Headplane was vulnerable to a path traversal / authorization bypass in the Headscale API client used by node and user rename operations. This issue has been patched in versions 0.6.3 and 0.7.0-beta.3.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-08
UPDATED
Date2026-06-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8