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

Comparison Overview

Santander UK Corporate & CommercialSantander UK Corporate & Commercial
VS
INGING
Santander UK Corporate & Commercial

Santander UK Corporate & Commercial

2, Triton Square, London, Greater London, NW1 3AN, GB

Last Update: 11/03/2026

View Profile
750/1000Fair

Are you looking to expand your business to new markets? Perhaps it’s not the people you know, but the people you don’t that could help. As one of the largest global banks, our network of specialists are on hand to help you navigate local markets. With a network that cov...

NAICS:522
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:3
Subsidiaries:24
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
ING

ING

Bijlmerdreef 106, Amsterdam, North Holland, NL, 1102 CT

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.ing.com
820/1000Good

ING is a pioneer in digital banking and on the forefront as one of the most innovative banks in the world. As ING, we have a clear purpose that represents our conviction of people’s potential. We don’t judge, coach, or tell people how to live their lives. However big or...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:69,608
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Santander UK Corporate & Commercial

Santander UK Corporate & Commercial

-
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
ING

ING

-
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 Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Santander UK Corporate & Commercial in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ING in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Santander UK Corporate & Commercial (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Santander UK Corporate & Commercial cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

ING 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...
Santander UK Corporate & Commercial

Santander UK Corporate & Commercial

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
ING

ING

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2