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

Comparison Overview

Snap Inc.Snap Inc.
VS
Xiaomi TechnologyXiaomi Technology
Snap Inc.

Snap Inc.

2772 Donald Douglas Loop N, Santa Monica, California, US, 90405

Last Update: 12/08/2026

View Profile
Between 550 and 599
https://careers.snap.com/
589/1000Very Poor

Snap is a technology company. We believe the camera presents the greatest opportunity to improve the way people live and communicate. Snap contributes to human progress by empowering people to express themselves, live in the moment, learn about the world, and have fun t...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:8,252
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
6
Attack type number
2
Xiaomi Technology

Xiaomi Technology

No. 33 Xi erqi Middle Road, Haidian District, Beijing,100085,China, Beijing, CN

Last Update: 21/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.mi.com/global
811/1000Good

Xiaomi Corporation was founded in April 2010 and listed on the Main Board of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange on July 9, 2018 (1810.HK). Xiaomi is a consumer electronics and smart manufacturing company with smartphones and smart hardware connected by an IoT platform at its ...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:26,139
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Snap Inc.

Snap Inc.

-
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
Xiaomi Technology

Xiaomi Technology

-
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 Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

Snap Inc. has 88.68% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

Xiaomi Technology has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Snap Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Snap Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Xiaomi Technology (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Xiaomi Technology 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...
Snap Inc.

Snap Inc.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
SNA1774298870
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
SNA1786559100
🔒 Incident : Breach
FACSNAINSROB1766549037
Xiaomi Technology

Xiaomi Technology

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
OPPXIAAND1772310272
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
XIA1768816067
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
XIA605062425

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-84411
SUMMARY

The web management service in affected RouterOS versions contains an integer underflow in its HTTP request body handling that is reachable before authentication. This can be leveraged by an unauthenticated network attacker to achieve arbitrary code execution as root, or to cause a denial of service, using a single crafted request.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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
3.9
CVE-2026-105051
SUMMARY

Denuvo Anti-Tamper through 2026-03-04 allows bypass of a hypervisor presence check via CPUID interception (SimpleSvm.sys on AMD; hyperkd.sys and hyperhv.dll on Intel).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 1.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 1.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
0.5
CVE-2026-105050
SUMMARY

PeaZip before 11.3.0, in a non-default configuration, is vulnerable to OS command injection via a filename in an archive because "quotation character already used in the string" is mishandled.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-105049
SUMMARY

Zilliz Attu before 3.0.0 has a Playground feature that does not require authentication for proxying arbitrary HTTP and HTTPS requests to URLs on the public internet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105048
SUMMARY

The Playground feature of Zilliz Attu before 3.0.0 allows SSRF (proxying of requests to private IP addresses).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2