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

Comparison Overview

TüpraşTüpraş
VS
ConocoPhillipsConocoPhillips
Tüpraş

Tüpraş

Tupras AS, İstanbul, Şişli, 34394, TR

Last Update: 12/02/2026

View Profile
772/1000Fair

İzmit, İzmir, Kırıkkale ve Batman’da bulunan dört rafinerisinde yıllık toplam 30 milyon tonluk ham petrol işleme kapasitesine sahip olan Tüpraş; Türkiye’nin en büyük sanayi şirketi ve enerji sektörünün lider oyuncusu olmanın yanında, Avrupa'nın 7. büyük rafineri şirketi...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:4,702
Subsidiaries:53
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
ConocoPhillips

ConocoPhillips

925 N Eldridge Pkwy, Houston, 77079, US

Last Update: 12/09/2026

View Profile

We are a global oil and gas company tasked with an important job—to safely find and deliver energy for the world. We’re experts in what we do—from the well site to the office. Across our operations and activities in 13 countries, we never forget our responsibility to ...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:16,502
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Tüpraş

Tüpraş

-
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
ConocoPhillips

ConocoPhillips

-
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 Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tüpraş in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ConocoPhillips in 2026.

Incidents

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

Tüpraş 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 - ConocoPhillips (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ConocoPhillips 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...
Tüpraş

Tüpraş

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
ConocoPhillips

ConocoPhillips

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-85893
SUMMARY

Use after free in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-69486
SUMMARY

Heap-based buffer overflow in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2025-11395
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Podman. If an attacker can pass a crafted tar archive to the `podman load` command, they can create files on the host machine with the privileges of the user running Podman.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-92259
SUMMARY

Integer overflow or wraparound vulnerability in Samsung Opensource Escargot allows attackers with write access to the bytecode-cache directory to cause a heap-based buffer overflow and denial of service via a crafted cache file. This issue affects Escargot: ac94df78493ee6fede286620d94f724e46b4d238.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-92257
SUMMARY

Netcore NR255-V version 1.5.130703 contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in L7 content management pages that use eval() sinks, affecting the call board text and policy group handling components. Attackers can inject persistent script payloads through these pages to have malicious code executed in the context of other users viewing the affected content.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/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
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3