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

Comparison Overview

Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠)Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠)
VS
LexisNexisLexisNexis
Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠)

Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠)

테헤란로 131 한국지식재산센터, Seoul, KR

Last Update: 08/03/2026

View Profile
753/1000Fair

2020년 8월 3일 공식 출범한 토스페이먼츠는 대한민국 전자결제 시장을 새롭게 바꿔나가는 것을 목표로 합니다. 온라인과 모바일 커머스 시장의 확대에 따라 일상 생활에서 뗄 수 없는 결제 서비스, 토스페이먼츠가 기술 및 비즈니스 모델 혁신을 통해 사업자와 소비자 모두에게 혜택이 돌아갈 수 있는 새로운 결제 서비스 경험을 제공하고자 합니다.

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:327
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
LexisNexis

LexisNexis

230 Park Avenue, New York City, 10017, US

Last Update: 23/06/2026

View Profile

LexisNexis is a leading innovator of private, secure, and authoritative Legal AI solutions that help legal and business professionals draft full documents with ease, make informed decisions faster, and deliver outstanding work and improved outcomes, all powered by trust...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:10,705
Subsidiaries:72
12-month incidents
4
Known data breaches
6
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠)

Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠)

-
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
LexisNexis

LexisNexis

-
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 Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠) in 2026.

Incidents

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

LexisNexis has 277.36% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠) 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 - LexisNexis (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LexisNexis 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...
Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠)

Toss Payments(토스페이먼츠)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
LexisNexis

LexisNexis

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
FORCISTELLEXSALCHAIVACAROPESTR1782226177
🔒 Incident : Breach
RELLEX1772562253
🔒 Incident : Breach
LEX1772555037

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-13512
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in Databend up to 1.2.881 on HTTP. This affects the function ClientSessionManager::state_key of the file src/query/service/src/servers/http/v1/session/client_session_manager.rs of the component Tenant Handler. The manipulation leads to authorization bypass. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-28
UPDATED
Date2026-06-28
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-2026-13511
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in VoltAgent up to 2.1.17. Affected by this issue is the function handleGetMemoryConversation of the file packages/server-core/src/handlers/memory.handlers.ts of the component Memory REST API. Executing a manipulation of the argument conversationId can lead to improper authorization. The attack may be performed from remote. This attack is characterized by high complexity. The exploitation is known to be difficult. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-28
UPDATED
Date2026-06-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.1)
CVSS2
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:S/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-13510
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in SimStudioAI sim up to 0.6.92. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality in the library apps/sim/lib/core/security/deployment.ts of the component Password Protection Handler. Performing a manipulation results in use of weak hash. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The attack's complexity is rated as high. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-28
UPDATED
Date2026-06-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS2
Base Score: 2.6
Complexity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-13509
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in RAGapp up to 0.1.5. Affected is the function FileHandler.upload_file/FileHandler.remove_file of the file src/ragapp/backend/controllers/files.py of the component Knowledge File Handler. Such manipulation leads to path traversal. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-28
UPDATED
Date2026-06-28
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-2026-13508
SUMMARY

A flaw has been found in khoj-ai khoj up to 2.0.0-beta.28. This impacts an unknown function of the file src/khoj/routers/api_chat.py of the component Conversation Sharing Handler. This manipulation of the argument conversation.agent causes incorrect authorization. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been published and may be used. The pull request to fix this issue awaits acceptance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-28
UPDATED
Date2026-06-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/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
2.1