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

Comparison Overview

WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025)WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025)
VS
Goldman SachsGoldman Sachs
WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025)

WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025)

N/A

Last Update: 27/07/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://wfc2025.kz/
754/1000Fair

WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES Evolving Landscape of CSDs: Navigating Challenges, Opportunities, and the Future of Post-Trade Infrastructures September 23–26, 2025 The Ritz-Carlton Almaty, Kazakhstan

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Goldman Sachs

Goldman Sachs

200 West Street, New York, 10282, US

Last Update: 10/08/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.goldmansachs.com
786/1000Fair

We aspire to be the world’s most exceptional financial institution, united by our shared values of partnership, client service, integrity, and excellence. Operating at the center of capital markets, we act as one firm, mobilizing our people, capital, and ideas to deli...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:67,203
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025)

WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025)

-
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
Goldman Sachs

Goldman Sachs

-
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 Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Goldman Sachs has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) 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 - Goldman Sachs (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Goldman Sachs 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...
WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025)

WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Goldman Sachs

Goldman Sachs

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
JONGENMCDGOL1775507547
🔒 Incident : Breach
GOL1766613328

FAQ

Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) company and Goldman Sachs company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) and Goldman Sachs, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) and Goldman Sachs, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) or Goldman Sachs ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) or Goldman Sachs ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) and Goldman Sachs, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between WORLD FORUM OF CENTRAL SECURITIES DEPOSITORIES (WFC2025) and Goldman Sachs, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9