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

Comparison Overview

Zillow Home Loans, LLCZillow Home Loans, LLC
VS
Danske BankDanske Bank
Zillow Home Loans, LLC

Zillow Home Loans, LLC

2600 Michelson Dr Suite 1201, Irvine, 92612, US

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
747/1000Moderate

Zillow Home Loans, LLC is a rapidly growing national provider of online mortgage lending services. We are committed to delivering best-in-class service and local market expertise, with communication every step of the way. We have offices located in Overland Park, Kansas...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:668
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Danske Bank

Danske Bank

Bernstorffsgade 40, Copenhagen, Capital Region of Denmark, DK, 1577

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.danskebank.com
809/1000Good

Danske Bank – A driver of growth and development For more than a 150 years, Danske Bank has strived to be a driver of growth and development in society. We have developed in tandem with the societies we are part of, and our advisory services, expertise and financial so...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:18,488
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Zillow Home Loans, LLC

Zillow Home Loans, LLC

-
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
Danske Bank

Danske Bank

-
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 Zillow Home Loans, LLC in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Danske Bank in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Zillow Home Loans, LLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Zillow Home Loans, LLC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Danske Bank (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Danske Bank cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Zillow Home Loans, LLC

Zillow Home Loans, LLC

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ZIL036091825
Danske Bank

Danske Bank

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-58281
SUMMARY

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-10660
SUMMARY

The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-61870
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.4
CVE-2026-61861
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-61858
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8