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

Comparison Overview

Wolters Kluwer CZWolters Kluwer CZ
VS
GLGGLG
Wolters Kluwer CZ

Wolters Kluwer CZ

U Nákladového nádraží 10, Praha, Czech Republic, 13000, CZ

Last Update: 12/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.wolterskluwer.cz/
753/1000Fair

Wolters Kluwer enables legal, tax, finance, and healthcare professionals to be more effective and efficient. We provide information, software, and services that deliver vital insights, intelligent tools, and the guidance of subject-matter experts. We create value by ...

NAICS:519
NAICS Definition:Other Information Services
Employees:69
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
GLG

GLG

60 East 42nd Street, 3rd Floor, New York, NY, US, 10165

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://glginsights.com
738/1000Moderate

GLG is the world’s largest insight network. We connect decision makers to the right experts so they can act with the confidence that comes from true clarity and have what it takes to get ahead. Our network of experts is the world’s largest source of first-hand expertise...

NAICS:519
NAICS Definition:Other Information Services
Employees:12,148
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Wolters Kluwer CZ

Wolters Kluwer CZ

-
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
GLG

GLG

-
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 Information Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Wolters Kluwer CZ in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Information Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for GLG in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Wolters Kluwer CZ (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Wolters Kluwer CZ cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

GLG 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...
Wolters Kluwer CZ

Wolters Kluwer CZ

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
GLG

GLG

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
GLG128072625

FAQ

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