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

Comparison Overview

Six Flags New EnglandSix Flags New England
VS
Warner Bros. DiscoveryWarner Bros. Discovery
Six Flags New England

Six Flags New England

1623 Main St Agawam, Massachusetts 01001, US

Last Update: 19/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.sixflags.com
763/1000Fair

Six Flags New England, The Entertainment Capital of New England, is a 230-acre theme park that is home to 11 heart-pounding roller coasters and great family entertainment.

NAICS:71
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:N/A
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Warner Bros. Discovery

Warner Bros. Discovery

New York City, US

Last Update: 16/05/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://wbd.com/
828/1000Good

Warner Bros. Discovery, a premier global media and entertainment company, offers audiences the world’s most differentiated and complete portfolio of content, brands and franchises across television, film, streaming and gaming. The new company combines WarnerMedia’s prem...

NAICS:71
NAICS Definition:Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Employees:42,105
Subsidiaries:30
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Six Flags New England

Six Flags New England

-
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
Warner Bros. Discovery

Warner Bros. Discovery

-
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 Entertainment Providers Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Six Flags New England in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Entertainment Providers Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Warner Bros. Discovery in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Six Flags New England (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Six Flags New England 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 - Warner Bros. Discovery (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Warner Bros. Discovery 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...
Six Flags New England

Six Flags New England

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Warner Bros. Discovery

Warner Bros. Discovery

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-10777
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in ealpha072 Student-Management-System up to 01451bd7a2f58cdda07bd0b86e3967582e3ecd08. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file admin/config.php of the component Administrative Backend. Such manipulation leads to improper authentication. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. 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
Date2026-06-03
UPDATED
Date2026-06-03
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-2026-10775
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in sgl-project SGLang up to 0.5.11. Affected by this vulnerability is the function data_hash of the component Cache Handler. This manipulation causes denial of service. The attack is restricted to local execution. A high degree of complexity is needed for the attack. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-03
UPDATED
Date2026-06-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.6)
CVSS2
Base Score: 2.4
Complexity: HIGH
AV:L/AC:H/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/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
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1
CVE-2026-22055
SUMMARY

Active IQ OneCollect version 2.7.3 contains hard-coded credentials that could allow an authenticated attacker with low privileges to perform unauthorized AutoSupport operations.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-03
UPDATED
Date2026-06-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-22054
SUMMARY

Active IQ Config Advisor version 6.7.3 contains hard-coded credentials that could allow an authenticated attacker with low privileges to perform unauthorized AutoSupport operations.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-03
UPDATED
Date2026-06-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-10771
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in crmeb crmeb_java 1.4. Affected is the function RestTemplate.getForEntity of the file crmeb-common/src/main/java/com/zbkj/common/utils/RestTemplateUtil.java of the component base64 Qrcode Endpoint. The manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-03
UPDATED
Date2026-06-03
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