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

Comparison Overview

WSP in GermanyWSP in Germany
VS
Tata TechnologiesTata Technologies
WSP in Germany

WSP in Germany

Dingolfinger Str. 1-15, München, Bayern, DE, 81673

Last Update: 17/01/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://wsp.com
751/1000Fair

We are one of the world’s leading professional services firms, uniting our engineering, advisory and science-based expertise to shape communities to advance humanity. ​ ​From local beginnings to a globe-spanning presence today, we operate in over 50 countries and emplo...

NAICS:54139
NAICS Definition:Engineering Services
Employees:145
Subsidiaries:33
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Tata Technologies

Tata Technologies

25 Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, Hinjawadi, Pune, 411057, IN

Last Update: 14/09/2026

View Profile
643/1000Poor

We're a global product engineering and digital services company focused on fulfilling our mission of helping the world drive, fly, build, and farm by enabling our customers to realize better products and deliver better experiences. We’re the strategic engineering partne...

NAICS:54139
NAICS Definition:Engineering Services
Employees:16,837
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
WSP in Germany

WSP in Germany

-
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
Tata Technologies

Tata Technologies

-
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 Engineering Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for WSP in Germany in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Engineering Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tata Technologies in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - WSP in Germany (X = Date, Y = Severity)

WSP in Germany 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 - Tata Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tata Technologies 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...
WSP in Germany

WSP in Germany

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Tata Technologies

Tata Technologies

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
TAT235040325
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
TAT702030425
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
TAT000020325

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA