Comparison Overview

Savage Tournaments

VS

E Gambling

Savage Tournaments

Las Vegas, Nevada 89139, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Matt Savage is the world's foremost Poker Tournament Director, responsible for directing over 400 televised events such as the World Series of Poker, World Poker Tour and many others. Although Matt's favorite job is running the worlds largest poker tournaments and events he has developed many other areas of expertise in the poker business. Integrity continues to be the focus of his career and looks to continue that goal as he expands into other areas of the ever growing poker world.

NAICS: 713
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 1
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

E Gambling

Geert Grootestraat 1, Deventer, Overijssel, NL, 7411 GS
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

E Gambling is opgericht door Robbie van Essen en Dennis Stegeman in 2009 met als doel meer ervaring op te doen als online marketeer. Deze ervaringen kunnen wij goed toepassen op de dagelijkse werkzaamheden van onze werkgevers. Echter in de loop der tijd is dit bedrijf enorm gegroeid. E Gambling richt zich met name op affiliate werkzaamheden binnen de casino branche. Momenteel bezit E Gambling meer dan 100 websites. www.blackjackmetgeld.com, www.casinometechtgeld.com en www.onlinehollandcasino.nl zijn voorbeelden van sites die onder E Gambling vallen. De werkzaamheden van E Gambling zijn hoofdzakelijk het oprichten/starten van nieuwe websites waarbij de focus ligt op online casino's, alsmede deze site's SEO technisch goed in te richten en actief bezig te zijn met linkbuilding.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 0
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/savage-tournaments.jpeg
Savage Tournaments
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/e-gambling.jpeg
E Gambling
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
Savage Tournaments
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
E Gambling
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Savage Tournaments in 2025.

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for E Gambling in 2025.

Incident History — Savage Tournaments (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Savage Tournaments cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — E Gambling (X = Date, Y = Severity)

E Gambling cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/savage-tournaments.jpeg
Savage Tournaments
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/e-gambling.jpeg
E Gambling
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

E Gambling company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Savage Tournaments company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, E Gambling company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Savage Tournaments company.

In the current year, E Gambling company and Savage Tournaments company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither E Gambling company nor Savage Tournaments company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither E Gambling company nor Savage Tournaments company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither E Gambling company nor Savage Tournaments company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Savage Tournaments company nor E Gambling company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Savage Tournaments nor E Gambling holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Savage Tournaments company nor E Gambling company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Savage Tournaments company employs more people globally than E Gambling company, reflecting its scale as a Gambling Facilities and Casinos.

Neither Savage Tournaments nor E Gambling holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Savage Tournaments nor E Gambling holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Savage Tournaments nor E Gambling holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Savage Tournaments nor E Gambling holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Savage Tournaments nor E Gambling holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Savage Tournaments nor E Gambling 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