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

Comparison Overview

台灣特洛奇資訊台灣特洛奇資訊
VS
e&e&
台灣特洛奇資訊

台灣特洛奇資訊

新北市中和區中正路920號, 新北市, 235, TW

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.telogy.com.tw/
759/1000Fair

特洛奇深耕資安市場多年,在網路資安以及環境資安控管方面,特洛奇擁有多樣化的產品,能針對客戶需求提出彈性化的解決方案,協助客戶找出各種威脅,完整資安防護環境。產品及服務內容涵蓋以下: 網路流量側錄與保全 網路安全與流量頻寬可視/可控化 資安服務(弱點掃描、滲透測試、紅隊演練) 資安檢測工具(DDOS檢測、效能檢測、弱點掃描、模糊測試、源碼檢測) 端點防護與資產管理查核系統 特洛奇是領先全球、服務可靠的資安解決方案供應商,不僅幫助服務提供商改善網路的效能,並協助企業從複雜的IT基礎設備中獲得更好的效益。特洛奇的客戶涵蓋了電信業與網路服務...

NAICS:513
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:2
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
e&

e&

Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, AE

Last Update: 08/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://eand.com
800/1000Good

We're a global technology group focused on innovation and collaboration to create a better future for all. Since 1976, we've been pioneering new technologies and expanding our reach to more people and places. Today, we provide services to over 163 million customers acro...

NAICS:513
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:30,398
Subsidiaries:18
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
台灣特洛奇資訊

台灣特洛奇資訊

-
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
e&

e&

-
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 Technology, Information and Internet Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for 台灣特洛奇資訊 in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for e& in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - 台灣特洛奇資訊 (X = Date, Y = Severity)

台灣特洛奇資訊 cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - e& (X = Date, Y = Severity)

e& 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...
台灣特洛奇資訊

台灣特洛奇資訊

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
TAI1192311102125
e&

e&

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-113705
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in a2aproject a2a-rs up to 0.4.3. This issue affects some unknown processing of the file a2a-server/src/error.rs. Executing a manipulation can lead to information exposure through error message. The attack can be executed remotely. This patch is called 713b943af94ab2d521d483b841618b97a2e78a4d. A patch should be applied to remediate this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-9825
SUMMARY

IBM Cyber Fraud 1.0.0 through 1.0.2 has a missing secure attribute allowing sensitive cookies to be transmitted over unencrypted connections, potentially enabling an attacker to intercept session data through network-based attacks.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-94402
SUMMARY

IBM Carbon Charts 0.4.0 through 1.27.19 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. The MeterChart component's Title.truncateTitle() function re-inserts a substring of user-supplied label text into the DOM via an unsanitized innerHTML write when the title exceeds the available container width. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the victim's browser session.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-93888
SUMMARY

IBM Sterling Connect Direct for Unix 6.4.0.0 through 6.4.0.6 and 6.3.0.0 through 6.3.0.7 apnotify utility is vulnerable to a code injection due to insufficient validation of user input.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-93744
SUMMARY

IBM i 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6 could allow an unathenticated remote attacker to bypass security restrictions due to improper access control. By sending a specially crafted HTTP request to any URL within the Navigator application prior to authentication, a bad actor could exploit this vulnerability to alter server-side session security state.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-20
UPDATED
Date2026-10-20
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9