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

Comparison Overview

Target Reply RomeTarget Reply Rome
VS
Amazon Web Services (AWS)Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Target Reply Rome

Target Reply Rome

Via Giorgione, 59, Rome, 00147, IT

Last Update: 20/12/2025

View Profile
750/1000Fair

Target Reply Rome is a company of the Reply group focused and specialized in implementing solutions involving artificial intelligence, machine learning, big data and advanced analytics. We support large and medium – size clients in data driven technological infrastructu...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:75
Subsidiaries:119
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

410 Terry Ave N, Seattle, 98019, US

Last Update: 10/10/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
http://aws.amazon.com
503/1000Critical

Launched in 2006, Amazon Web Services (AWS) began exposing key infrastructure services to businesses in the form of web services -- now widely known as cloud computing. The ultimate benefit of cloud computing, and AWS, is the ability to leverage a new business model and...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:148,035
Subsidiaries:95
12-month incidents
28
Known data breaches
7
Attack type number
5

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Target Reply Rome

Target Reply Rome

-
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
Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

-
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 Target Reply Rome in 2026.

Incidents

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

Amazon Web Services (AWS) has 2645.1% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Target Reply Rome (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Target Reply Rome 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 - Amazon Web Services (AWS) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Amazon Web Services (AWS) 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...
Target Reply Rome

Target Reply Rome

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
AMA1791008649
🔒 Incident : Breach
GITGOOAMA1790591146
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
AMA1789374268

FAQ

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