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

Comparison Overview

SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟
VS
KyndrylKyndryl
SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟

SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟

台北市松德路171號, 台北市, 110, TW

Last Update: 21/03/2026

View Profile
749/1000Moderate

SoftwareONE 是一家跨國企業,總部位於瑞士,在歐洲、北美、南美、亞太地區等多個國家設有分部。我們從事專業電腦軟體代理、服務及為客戶提供全球軟體管理的公司。SoftwareONE 不僅是微軟(Microsoft) 於歐洲、美國、南美和亞洲地區等大型客戶經銷商(LAR) ,同時也是Adobe公司在上述地區的 Adobe License Center (ALC)。SoftwareONE在全球80+個國家都設有公司和辦事處,我們的足跡遍佈世界各地,我們致力於發展全球業務,在全球,我們擁有數百位軟體授權專家和SAM專家,為客戶提供專業...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:9
Subsidiaries:51
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Kyndryl

Kyndryl

New York City, US

Last Update: 11/09/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://kyndryl.com
651/1000Weak

We have the world’s best talent that design, run, and manage the most advanced and reliable technology infrastructure each day. Together, we think holistically about the health of these vital technology ecosystems. We are a focused, independent company that builds on o...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:61,535
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟

SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟

-
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
Kyndryl

Kyndryl

-
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 IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟 in 2026.

Incidents

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

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

Incidents

Incident History - SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟 (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟 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 - Kyndryl (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Kyndryl 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...
SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟

SoftwareOne Taiwan 台灣碩軟

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Kyndryl

Kyndryl

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
HCLTAT1786448292
🔒 Incident : Breach
IHGHCLGAPWYNMCDVODKYNMIC1786975327

FAQ

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