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

Comparison Overview

SenerSener
VS
Quest GlobalQuest Global
Sener

Sener

Avenida de Zugazarte, 56, Getxo, 48930, ES

Last Update: 30/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.group.sener
769/1000Fair

At Sener we want to transform the world by challenging the boundaries of technology. For 70 years we have been responding to highly demanding challenges, helping our clients with innovative and efficient solutions that allow us to advance as a society, accompanied by th...

NAICS:54139
NAICS Definition:Engineering Services
Employees:3,832
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Quest Global

Quest Global

7, Temasek Boulevard,, #09-04 Suntec Tower One,, Singapore, SG, 038987

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.questglobal.com/
791/1000Fair

We are Quest Global. We’re in the business of engineering, but what we’re really building is a brighter future. It’s not just what we do, but why we do it that makes us different. We believe engineering has the unique opportunity to solve the problems of today that stan...

NAICS:54139
NAICS Definition:Engineering Services
Employees:20,185
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Sener

Sener

-
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
Quest Global

Quest Global

-
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 Engineering Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Sener in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Engineering Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Quest Global has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

Sener 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 - Quest Global (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Quest Global 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...
Sener

Sener

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Quest Global

Quest Global

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
QUE1774275950

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
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
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8