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

Comparison Overview

The Shadowserver FoundationThe Shadowserver Foundation
VS
NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONSNETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS
The Shadowserver Foundation

The Shadowserver Foundation

N/A

Last Update: 14/08/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.shadowserver.org
718/1000Moderate

The Shadowserver Foundation is a non-profit watchdog group of security professionals that gather, track, and report on malware, botnet activity, and electronic fraud. It is the mission of the Shadowserver Foundation to improve the security of the Internet by raising awa...

NAICS:541514
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:27
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS

NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS

Suwalska 19/1, Poznan, 60-461, PL

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.n-security.com
767/1000Fair

## Our core business We manage linux / unix server infrastructures and build the efficient and secure networking environments using hardware cutting edge technologies suited to the needs of the project and the client. We believe in quality, opposed to quantity. O...

NAICS:541514
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:10,471
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
The Shadowserver Foundation

The Shadowserver Foundation

-
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
NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS

NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS

-
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 Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)

The Shadowserver Foundation has 5.66% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS in 2026.

Incidents

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

The Shadowserver Foundation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS 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...
The Shadowserver Foundation

The Shadowserver Foundation

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
THE1786703061
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
THE1766992985
NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS

NETWORK-SECURITY-SOLUTIONS

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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