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

Comparison Overview

The Julia LanguageThe Julia Language
VS
EpicEpic
The Julia Language

The Julia Language

Everywhere on Earth, OO

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://julialang.org
750/1000Fair

Julia is a high-level, high-performance dynamic programming language for technical computing. Join the conversation at #JuliaLang

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:9
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Epic

Epic

1979 Milky Way, Verona, WI, US, 53593

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.epic.com/
781/1000Fair

Join us in our mission to help the world get well, help the world stay well, and help future generations be healthier. We hire smart and motivated people from all academic majors to code, test, and implement healthcare software that hundreds of millions of patients and...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:17,128
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
The Julia Language

The Julia Language

-
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
Epic

Epic

-
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 Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The Julia Language in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Epic in 2026.

Incidents

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

The Julia Language 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 - Epic (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Epic 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 Julia Language

The Julia Language

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Epic

Epic

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
EPI224917123

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9