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

Comparison Overview

T-Mobile AcceleratorT-Mobile Accelerator
VS
Millicom (Tigo)Millicom (Tigo)
T-Mobile Accelerator

T-Mobile Accelerator

Overland Park, US

Last Update: 11/03/2026

View Profile
754/1000Fair

Startups work directly with T-Mobile leaders and other industry experts and mentors to develop and commercialize the next disruptive emerging products, applications and solutions made possible by T-Mobile’s network today and in the future.

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Millicom (Tigo)

Millicom (Tigo)

2 Rue du Fort Bourbon, Luxembourg, 1249, LU

Last Update: 05/07/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.millicom.com
790/1000Fair

Millicom (NASDAQ U.S.: TIGO, Nasdaq) is a leading provider of fixed and mobile telecommunications services in Latin America. Through our TIGO® and Tigo Business® brands, we provide a wide range of digital services and products, including TIGO Money for mobile financial ...

NAICS:517
NAICS Definition:Telecommunications
Employees:29,169
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
T-Mobile Accelerator

T-Mobile Accelerator

-
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
Millicom (Tigo)

Millicom (Tigo)

-
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 Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for T-Mobile Accelerator in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Millicom (Tigo) in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - T-Mobile Accelerator (X = Date, Y = Severity)

T-Mobile Accelerator cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Millicom (Tigo) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Millicom (Tigo) 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...
T-Mobile Accelerator

T-Mobile Accelerator

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Millicom (Tigo)

Millicom (Tigo)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
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:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9