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

Comparison Overview

TEBTEB
VS
Intesa SanpaoloIntesa Sanpaolo
TEB

TEB

N/A

Last Update: 27/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.teb.com.tr
777/1000Fair

Türk bankacılık sektörünün saygın ve ayrıcalıklı finans kurumu olan TEB, bankacılık faaliyetlerine 1927 yılında başlamıştır. Kurulduğu yıldan bu yana genişlettiği şube ağı, ürün ve hizmet çeşitliliği ile yatırım, leasing, faktoring, sigorta ve portföy yönetimi gibi fina...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:7,539
Subsidiaries:52
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Intesa Sanpaolo

Intesa Sanpaolo

Piazza San Carlo 156, Turin, TO, IT, 10121

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
624/1000Poor

Intesa Sanpaolo è il maggior gruppo bancario in Italia con una significativa presenza internazionale. Il suo business model distintivo la rende leader a livello europeo nel Wealth Management, Protection & Advisory e ne caratterizza l’orientamento al digitale. I’impegno ...

NAICS:52211
NAICS Definition:Commercial Banking
Employees:54,522
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
TEB

TEB

-
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
Intesa Sanpaolo

Intesa Sanpaolo

-
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 TEB in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Banking Industry Avg (This Year)

Intesa Sanpaolo has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - TEB (X = Date, Y = Severity)

TEB 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 - Intesa Sanpaolo (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Intesa Sanpaolo 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...
TEB

TEB

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Intesa Sanpaolo

Intesa Sanpaolo

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
INT1774888779
🔒 Incident : Breach
INTYAHIAB1766434075
🔒 Incident : Breach
INT1774895581

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-19756
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in Dromara lamp-cloud up to 5.10.0. This affects an unknown part of the file DefGenProjectController.java of the component Code Generator. Such manipulation of the argument outputDir/parent/projectPrefix leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-19753
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Model Context Protocol mcp-rdf-explorer 1.0.0. Affected is the function explore_url of the file src/mcp-rdf-explorer/server.py of the component MCP Server. Performing a manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-73843
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.2 and 1.1.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go served caller-facing management APIs on the externally reachable agent listener without authentication, allowing network-reachable attackers to invoke /api/proxy/ and /api/exec/ operations, proxy the data-plane Kubernetes API, and execute commands in workload pods in multi-cluster deployments. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.2 and 1.1.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-73842
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go exposed /api/proxy/, /api/exec/, and /api/wirelogs/ on an internal listener without requiring a client certificate or token, allowing any network-reachable caller to read tenant Kubernetes Secrets, mutate workloads, and execute commands across connected data planes. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-73841
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. From 1.2.0-rc.1 until 1.2.0, internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/exec.go and internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/wirelogs.go authorize component:exec and wirelogs:view using the caller-supplied project query parameter instead of comp.Spec.Owner.ProjectName, allowing a user with a project-scoped grant to execute commands in and read wirelogs from components owned by other projects in the same namespace. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8