Comparison Overview

SECURENET-TECH

VS

Diebold Nixdorf

SECURENET-TECH

London, London, London, GB, SE1
Last Update: 2025-12-10

Provide on-demand IT engineering, technical services, professional services, consultancy, IT support, managed services and cloud solutions. Service sand solutions to help our clients fill IT skills and knowledge gaps, manage existing IT infrastructure, help plan/design/implement and support new on-premise (hardware/software) solutions for migrations to cloud/manaed services.

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

Diebold Nixdorf

350 Orchard Ave NE, North Canton, Ohio, 44720, US
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 750 and 799

We automate, digitize and transform the way people bank and shop. We offer proven expertise and comprehensive portfolios in cutting-edge product technology, multi-vendor software and service excellence for financial and retail customers. Consumer behavior is changing rapidly; people are empowered and connected and expect unprecedented service and convenience. The world is “always on” – a digital era requiring us to orchestrate touchpoints in ways that meet and exceed the 24/7 automation needs of the banking and retail worlds. Diebold Nixdorf employs approximately 21,000 employees in more than 130 countries worldwide. We are publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “DBD.” Specialties: financial and retail self-service solutions, services, security solutions, software, cash management, branch and store transformation

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 19,828
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/securenet-tech.jpeg
SECURENET-TECH
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/diebold.jpeg
Diebold Nixdorf
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
SECURENET-TECH
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Diebold Nixdorf
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

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

No incidents recorded for SECURENET-TECH in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Diebold Nixdorf in 2025.

Incident History — SECURENET-TECH (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SECURENET-TECH cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Diebold Nixdorf (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Diebold Nixdorf cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/securenet-tech.jpeg
SECURENET-TECH
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2023
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Unknown vulnerability in software
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/diebold.jpeg
Diebold Nixdorf
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2024
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Hard Drive Encryption Bypass
Motivation: Financial Data Breach, Unauthorized Cash Withdrawals
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 05/2020
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Diebold Nixdorf company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to SECURENET-TECH company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Diebold Nixdorf company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to SECURENET-TECH company.

In the current year, Diebold Nixdorf company and SECURENET-TECH company have not reported any cyber incidents.

SECURENET-TECH company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Diebold Nixdorf company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Diebold Nixdorf company nor SECURENET-TECH company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Diebold Nixdorf company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while SECURENET-TECH company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Diebold Nixdorf company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while SECURENET-TECH company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither SECURENET-TECH nor Diebold Nixdorf holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither SECURENET-TECH company nor Diebold Nixdorf company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Diebold Nixdorf company employs more people globally than SECURENET-TECH company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither SECURENET-TECH nor Diebold Nixdorf holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither SECURENET-TECH nor Diebold Nixdorf holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither SECURENET-TECH nor Diebold Nixdorf holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither SECURENET-TECH nor Diebold Nixdorf holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither SECURENET-TECH nor Diebold Nixdorf holds HIPAA certification.

Neither SECURENET-TECH nor Diebold Nixdorf holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/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
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N