Comparison Overview
Storebrand

Storebrand
Professor Kohts vei 9, Lysaker, 1327, NO
Last Update: 04/12/2025
Storebrand er et nordisk finanskonsern som tilbyr tjenester innen pensjon, sparing, bank og forsikring. Vi ønsker å tilby bærekraftige løsninger og motivere våre kunder til å ta gode økonomiske valg for fremtiden: sammen skaper vi en fremtid å glede seg til. Med en for...

Lincoln Financial
150 N. Radnor-Chester Road, Radnor, PA, US, 19087
Last Update: 08/06/2026
Lincoln Financial (NYSE: LNC) helps people to confidently plan for their version of a successful future. We focus on identifying a clear path to financial security, with products including annuities, investments, life insurance, group protection, and retirement plan ser...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Storebrand







Lincoln Financial






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Storebrand in 2026.
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
Lincoln Financial has 5.66% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Storebrand (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Storebrand cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Lincoln Financial (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Lincoln Financial cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Storebrand

Lincoln Financial
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Improper access control in Microsoft Edge for Android allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature over a network.
A security vulnerability has been detected in NousResearch hermes-agent up to 2026.4.30. Affected is the function GatewayStreamConsumer._filter_and_accumulate of the file gateway/stream_consumer.py of the component Streaming Reasoning Tag Filter. The manipulation leads to improper handling of case sensitivity. The attack may be initiated remotely. The attack's complexity is rated as high. The exploitability is told to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The project decided to not implement a dedicated fix: "[T]he analysis and the fix are both sound. It just lands below the bar for the maintenance cost of a duplicated scrub path."
- https://gist.github.com/YLChen-007/2229e5505bcbb3e15a7ae8fba4c4be37
- https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-agent/
- https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-agent/issues/27288
- https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-agent/pull/28631#issuecomment-4622188016
- https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-14617
- https://vuldb.com/submit/844654
- https://vuldb.com/vuln/376134
- https://vuldb.com/vuln/376134/cti
Insufficient ui warning of dangerous operations in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.
Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.
Relative path traversal in Microsoft Edge for Android allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information locally.