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

Comparison Overview

Alibaba UC AdsAlibaba UC Ads
VS
Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG)Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG)
Alibaba UC Ads

Alibaba UC Ads

No. 163, Pingyun Rd., Huangpu West Avenue,Tianhe Dist.,, Guangzhou, 510627, CN

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://ucads.ucweb.com
765/1000Fair

About UC Ads UC Ads, empowered by UCWeb and Alibaba, is a mobile marketing solutions provider. With its intelligent content marketing solutions, huge user base and advanced technologies, UC Ads is able to help clients across the globe to connect with the right audienc...

NAICS:513
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:9
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG)

Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG)

800 Connecticut Avenue, Norwalk, 06854, US

Last Update: 24/06/2026

View Profile
758/1000Fair

Booking Holdings is the world’s leading provider of online travel & related services, provided to consumers and local partners in more than 220 countries and territories through six primary consumer-facing brands: Booking.com, Priceline, Agoda, Rentalcars.com, KAYAK and...

NAICS:513
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:17,812
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Alibaba UC Ads

Alibaba UC Ads

-
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
Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG)

Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG)

-
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 Technology, Information and Internet Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Alibaba UC Ads in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Avg (This Year)

Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG) has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Alibaba UC Ads (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Alibaba UC Ads cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG) 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...
Alibaba UC Ads

Alibaba UC Ads

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG)

Booking Holdings (NASDAQ: BKNG)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
AGOBOO1776904233
🔒 Incident : Breach
ADOGOOMICEURBOO1776594302

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67866
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67863
SUMMARY

In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-19026
SUMMARY

H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-19025
SUMMARY

H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA