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

Comparison Overview

West Texas GasWest Texas Gas
VS
EcopetrolEcopetrol
West Texas Gas

West Texas Gas

303 Veterans Airpark Ln, STE 5000, Midland, TX, US, 79705

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.westtexasgas.com
721/1000Moderate

WTG, based in Midland, has core businesses in natural gas distribution, natural gas transmission, gas gathering/processing, and NGL liquids transmission. WTG owns and operates approximately 5,783 miles of Natural Gas Distribution mainlines and serves 28,670 customers w...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:249
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Ecopetrol

Ecopetrol

Cra. 13 No. 36-24, Bogotá, CO, ----

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.ecopetrol.com.co
654/1000Weak

Ecopetrol (NYSE: EC) es la compañía más grande en Colombia y uno de los principales grupos de energía de Latinoamérica. Cuenta con más de 18.000 empleados y es responsable del 60% de la producción de hidrocarburos en Colombia. Es propietaria de las dos refinerías del Co...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:13,056
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
West Texas Gas

West Texas Gas

-
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
Ecopetrol

Ecopetrol

-
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 West Texas Gas in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

Ecopetrol has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - West Texas Gas (X = Date, Y = Severity)

West Texas Gas cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Ecopetrol 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...
West Texas Gas

West Texas Gas

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
WES723072525
Ecopetrol

Ecopetrol

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
ECO1784557630
🔒 Incident : Breach
ECO1784348677

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8