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

Comparison Overview

SicrediSicredi
VS
PING ANPING AN
Sicredi

Sicredi

Av. Assis Brasil, Porto Alegre, 91010-003, BR

Last Update: 17/09/2026

View Profile
807/1000Good

We are born collaborative We believe that change is only possible when everyone works together for the same purpose, after all, cooperativism is in our DNA. Besides this, we know that as important as it is to provide affordable financial solutions it is just as importa...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:20,517
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
PING AN

PING AN

No. 5033 Yitian Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, 518046, CN

Last Update: 15/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://group.pingan.com/
830/1000Good

This is the official Company Page of Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd. (HKEx: 2318; SSE: 601318; ADR: PNGAY). Ping An strives to become a world leading technology-powered financial services group. We believe the way people receive financial services an...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:51,286
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Sicredi

Sicredi

-
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
PING AN

PING AN

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Sicredi in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PING AN in 2026.

Incidents

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

Sicredi 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 - PING AN (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PING AN 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...
Sicredi

Sicredi

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
PING AN

PING AN

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-105222
SUMMARY

The alexpechkarev/google-maps Laravel package through 12.16 disables TLS certificate verification by default because the bundled config sets ssl_verify_peer to FALSE, which is passed to CURLOPT_SSL_VERIFYPEER. On-path attackers can present any certificate to intercept Google Maps web-service requests, steal the API key from the query string, and tamper with responses.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-04
UPDATED
Date2026-10-04
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-105221
SUMMARY

The gist RubyGem before 6.1.0 contains an improper certificate validation vulnerability that allows on-path attackers to intercept HTTPS traffic because http_connection in lib/gist.rb sets VERIFY_NONE. Attackers can present any certificate to read or modify GitHub API traffic, stealing OAuth tokens and login credentials to read and modify the victim's gists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-04
UPDATED
Date2026-10-04
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-105220
SUMMARY

Twine 2 desktop through 2.12.0 contains a cross-site scripting vulnerability in importStories() that executes markup from imported story files in the editor window. Attackers can craft a story file whose script calls the twineElectron openWithScratchFile IPC bridge to write and open a .bat file, executing code as the user.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-04
UPDATED
Date2026-10-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-105167
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in kishor-23 food-waste-management-system 411989e3ecb82895e53dca7865f72145f03d7d93/b3a70b2c492dc9904de5be1ad9389bd79b87f82c. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file admin/donate.php. Executing a manipulation of the argument location can lead to sql injection. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. This product utilizes a rolling release system for continuous delivery, and as such, version information for affected or updated releases is not disclosed. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-04
UPDATED
Date2026-10-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105166
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in kishor-23 food-waste-management-system 411989e3ecb82895e53dca7865f72145f03d7d93/b3a70b2c492dc9904de5be1ad9389bd79b87f82c. The affected element is the function insert of the file fooddonateform.php of the component Food Donation Form. Performing a manipulation of the argument image-choice results in sql injection. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. This product adopts a rolling release strategy to maintain continuous delivery. Therefore, version details for affected or updated releases cannot be specified. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-04
UPDATED
Date2026-10-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9