Comparison Overview

VakıfBank

VS

ING

VakıfBank

İstanbul, İstanbul Finans Merkezi, TR, 34415
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 750 and 799

1954 yılında, vakıf kaynaklarını ekonomik kalkınmanın gereksinimleri doğrultusunda en iyi biçimde değerlendirmek amacıyla kurulan VakıfBank, o günden bu yana çağdaş bankacılık yöntemleri ve uygulamalarıyla Türkiye’nin tasarruf düzeyinin gelişim sürecine katkıda bulunmaktadır. VakıfBank; bölgesinin en iyi, en çok tercih edilen ve değer yaratan bankası olma vizyonu doğrultusunda, vakıf kültüründen aldığı güçle, kendisine emanet edilen varlık ve değerleri etkin ve verimli yöneterek müşteriler, çalışanlar, hissedarlar ve topluma kattığı değerleri sürekli artırma misyonuyla hareket etmektedir. Kurumsal, ticari ve küçük işletme bankacılığının yanı sıra bireysel ve özel bankacılık alanlarında da çağdaş bankacılık ürün ve hizmetleri sunan VakıfBank, özellikle bir alanda değil, tüm finansal alanlarda uzmanlaşmış, Türkiye’nin önde gelen bankalarından biridir. Temel bankacılık ürün ve hizmetlerine ek olarak yatırım bankacılığı ve sermaye piyasası faaliyetlerinde de bulunan VakıfBank, iç ve dış ticaretin finansmanında öncü bir rol üstlenmektedir. Ayrıca, finansal iştirakleri aracılığıyla sigortacılıktan finansal kiralama ve factoring hizmetlerine kadar geniş bir yelpazede yer alan finansal ürünleri çağın gerektirdiği yüksek teknolojilerle müşterilerine sunmaktadır. VakıfBank’ın ABD New York, Kuzey Irak Erbil, Katar Doha şubelerinin yanı sıra Bahreyn’de kıyı bankacılığı şubesi bulunmaktadır. Ayrıca, Avusturya’da VakıfBank International AG (Viyana Şubesi ve Almanya’da Köln Şubesi), KKTC’de Tasfiye Halinde World Vakıf UBB. Ltd. ve Kıbrıs Vakıflar Bank. Ltd. olmak üzere yurt dışında üç bankada da iştiraki bulunmaktadır. VakıfBank’ın diğer iştirakleri arasında; Vakıf Faktoring A.Ş., Vakıf Finansal Kiralama A.Ş., Vakıf Gayrimenkul Yatırım Ortaklığı A.Ş., Vakıf Menkul Kıymet Yat. Ort. A.Ş., Vakıf Yatırım Menkul Değerler A.Ş. Vakıf Pazarlama San. ve Ticaret A.Ş., Taksim Otelcilik A.Ş., Vakıf Enerji ve Madencilik A.Ş., Vakıf Gayrimenkul Değerleme A.Ş. bulunmaktadır.

NAICS: 52211
NAICS Definition: Commercial Banking
Employees: 11,273
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

ING

Bijlmerdreef 106, Amsterdam, North Holland, NL, 1102 CT
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 800 and 849

ING is a pioneer in digital banking and on the forefront as one of the most innovative banks in the world. As ING, we have a clear purpose that represents our conviction of people’s potential. We don’t judge, coach, or tell people how to live their lives. However big or small, modest or grand, we empower people and businesses to realise their vision for a better future. We made the promise to make banking frictionless, removing barriers to progress, and make people confident in their financial decisions. As a global bank we have a huge opportunity – and responsibility – to make an impact for the better. We can play a role by financing change, sharing knowledge, and innovating. Being sustainable is in all the choices we make—as a lender, as a partner and through the services we offer our customers

NAICS: 52211
NAICS Definition: Commercial Banking
Employees: 69,608
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/vakifbank.jpeg
VakıfBank
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ing.jpeg
ING
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
VakıfBank
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
ING
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Banking Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for VakıfBank in 2026.

Incidents vs Banking Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ING in 2026.

Incident History — VakıfBank (X = Date, Y = Severity)

VakıfBank cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — ING (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ING cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/vakifbank.jpeg
VakıfBank
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ing.jpeg
ING
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ING company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to VakıfBank company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, ING company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to VakıfBank company.

In the current year, ING company and VakıfBank company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither ING company nor VakıfBank company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither ING company nor VakıfBank company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither ING company nor VakıfBank company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither VakıfBank company nor ING company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither VakıfBank nor ING holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

ING company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to VakıfBank company.

ING company employs more people globally than VakıfBank company, reflecting its scale as a Banking.

Neither VakıfBank nor ING holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither VakıfBank nor ING holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither VakıfBank nor ING holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither VakıfBank nor ING holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither VakıfBank nor ING holds HIPAA certification.

Neither VakıfBank nor ING holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N