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

Comparison Overview

Sparkasse FürstenfeldbruckSparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck
VS
Crédit Agricole CIBCrédit Agricole CIB
Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck

Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck

Hauptstraße 8, Fürstenfeldbruck, 82256, DE

Last Update: 28/03/2026

View Profile
755/1000Fair

Die Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck ist Marktführer in der Region und zählt zu den großen Sparkassen Bayerns. Über 600 Mitarbeiter schätzen das Wohnen, Arbeiten und die kurzen Wege in einem der attraktivsten Wirtschaftsräume Deutschlands. Die direkte Nähe zur Landeshauptstad...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:149
Subsidiaries:63
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Crédit Agricole CIB

Crédit Agricole CIB

12, place des Etats-Unis, Montrouge, 92547, FR

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.ca-cib.com
786/1000Fair

Crédit Agricole CIB is the corporate and investment banking arm of Crédit Agricole Group, 9th largest banking group worldwide in terms of balance sheet size in 2023 (The Banker, July 2024). Nearly 8,600 employees across Europe, the Americas, Asia-Pacific, the Middle Ea...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:14,195
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck

Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck

-
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
Crédit Agricole CIB

Crédit Agricole CIB

-
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 Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Crédit Agricole CIB in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck 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 - Crédit Agricole CIB (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Crédit Agricole CIB 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...
Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck

Sparkasse Fürstenfeldbruck

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Crédit Agricole CIB

Crédit Agricole CIB

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71983
SUMMARY

MSI Radix AXE6600 router firmware version v781521 contains a command injection vulnerability in the wps.cgi interface that allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands by injecting malicious input through the pin2g, pin5g, or pin6g parameters. Attackers can exploit these unsanitized parameters to execute arbitrary commands on the affected device and obtain root privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
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-2026-71502
SUMMARY

CTI-Transmute contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability caused by insufficient neutralization of Vue template expression delimiters in server-rendered user-controlled data. An unauthenticated attacker can create a public conversion whose name or description contains a malicious Vue expression using the application's configured [[ ... ]] delimiters. User profile names may provide an additional injection vector. Although Jinja HTML escaping is applied, the resulting value is subsequently included in a DOM region compiled by Vue. Vue interprets the attacker-controlled value as a template expression rather than ordinary text. By accessing the JavaScript Function constructor from within the expression, an attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the security context of the CTI-Transmute origin. The application's nonce-based Content Security Policy does not prevent exploitation because the Vue runtime compiler requires the unsafe-eval policy exception. The malicious payload is stored by the application and executed whenever another user opens an affected page, such as the public conversion detail page. The victim may be a normal user or an administrator. Successful exploitation could allow the attacker to: * Access data available to the victim through the application. * Extract API keys, tokens, or other sensitive information exposed to the page. * Perform authenticated actions using the victim's session. * Modify conversions or other application data. * Escalate the impact by targeting an administrator. A demonstrated payload can use [].constructor.constructor(...) to obtain the JavaScript Function constructor and execute arbitrary code. The regression tests also show that a short first-stage payload could retrieve an uncapped conversion description and evaluate a larger second-stage payload. The patch addresses the vulnerability by registering a global Jinja finalize hook that inserts a zero-width Unicode word joiner inside every Vue delimiter found in server-rendered values. This prevents Vue from recognizing the values as template expressions while preserving their visible representation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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-2026-71958
SUMMARY

D-Link DWR-M961 devices with hardware version C1 and software version 1.1.2_C1_202602110044 contain a buffer overflow vulnerability in the quicksetup.cgi interface. A remote attacker can write overly long strings to the test4, ssid2, and username fields and execute arbitrary commands by crafting a specific payload, or cause the device to crash.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
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-2026-71957
SUMMARY

D-Link DWR-M961 devices with hardware version C1 and software version 1.1.2_C1_202602110044 contain a buffer overflow vulnerability in the app.cgi interface. A remote attacker can write an overly long string to the netAcc.addlist[].name field and execute arbitrary commands by crafting a specific payload, or cause the device to crash.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
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-2026-71956
SUMMARY

D-Link DWR-M961 devices with hardware version C1 and software version 1.1.2_C1_202602110044 contain a command injection vulnerability in the app.cgi interface. A remote attacker can inject arbitrary malicious commands into the netDig.ping.dst field, resulting in command execution with root privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
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