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

Comparison Overview

The HartfordThe Hartford
VS
Morgan StanleyMorgan Stanley
The Hartford

The Hartford

690 Asylum Avenue, Hartford, 06155, US

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.thehartford.com
749/1000Moderate

Showing up for people isn’t just what we do. It’s who we are – for over 200 years. And while it looks different every day, we do more to innovate for our customers, our communities and our employees. Because you put your trust in us.

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:21,364
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1
Morgan Stanley

Morgan Stanley

1585 Broadway, New York, 10036, US

Last Update: 20/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.morganstanley.com
815/1000Good

Morgan Stanley is a leading global financial services firm providing investment banking, securities, wealth management and investment management services. With a 90-year history, Morgan Stanley today operates in 42 countries serving corporations, governments, institutio...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:103,276
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
The Hartford

The Hartford

-
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
Morgan Stanley

Morgan Stanley

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The Hartford in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Morgan Stanley in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - The Hartford (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Hartford cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Morgan Stanley (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Morgan Stanley 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...
The Hartford

The Hartford

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
THE107080525
🔒 Incident : Breach
THE454072725
🔒 Incident : Breach
THE622072925
Morgan Stanley

Morgan Stanley

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
MOR75918422
🔒 Incident : Breach
MOR115072825
🔒 Incident : Breach
MOR037072925

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-105761
SUMMARY

Dify is an open-source LLM app development platform. Prior to 1.16.0, the PUT /console/api/apps/<app_id>/server endpoint in api/controllers/console/app/mcp_server.py used AppMCPServerController.put() to retrieve an AppMCPServer by the client-supplied server ID without verifying that the server belonged to the requested application and tenant. An authenticated workspace member could therefore change another application's MCP server status and parameters, potentially redirecting data or disabling the service. This issue is fixed in version 1.16.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-105760
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, a caller can use the request-level media_io_kwargs field to select the GLMGA video backend and supply large values for the fps and max_frames options without a strict work ceiling. GLMGA constructs and deduplicates an attacker-sized pre-decode frame-index list, allowing a compact request and tiny valid video to consume disproportionate CPU time and memory in the shared media-loading executor. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105759
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, the Rust frontend's track_http_metrics middleware records the raw HTTP method token as a Prometheus label for requests reaching registered routes. An unauthenticated attacker can send unique arbitrary method tokens to unguarded routes such as /tokenize, causing Prometheus's Family::get_or_create function to permanently create counter and histogram label sets. Those label sets increase process memory usage and enlarge the /metrics response until the service or monitoring path is exhausted. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-105758
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. From 0.24.0 until 0.30.0, the Qwen2VLVideoBackend and Qwen3VLVideoBackend classes accept request-level values for the media_io_kwargs.video.max_frames and media_io_kwargs.video.fps fields without enforcing server-side ceilings. An unauthenticated caller can submit these values to the /tokenize endpoint, causing the sampler to decode every frame selected from attacker-controlled video input, consume disproportionate frontend memory, and potentially terminate the API process before scheduling or admission control. The Rust frontend is not affected because it rejects the media_io_kwargs field. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105757
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, structured-output request failures can escape request-scoped validation and reach the EngineCore fatal-error path. A per-request backend mismatch can re-raise a grammar compilation exception, padding produced by the ngram_gpu speculative-decoding mode can pass a negative token to guidance validation, and the Rust frontend can admit empty structured-output values that the Python frontend rejects, allowing ordinary constrained-generation requests to terminate the shared engine. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8