Comparison Overview

Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB)

VS

Duke Energy Corporation

Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB)

1st Floor, WAPDA Building, DHAKA, 1000, BD
Last Update: 2026-03-27
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.bpdb.gov.bd/bpdb_new/

Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) is a statutory body established on May 1, 1972 by the Presidential Order No. 59 bifurcating erstwhile Bangladesh Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA). BPDB was formed as an integrated utility with the responsibility of power generation, transmission, and distribution. At present, BPDB is the Single Buyer in the Power Industry of Bangladesh.

NAICS: 22
NAICS Definition: Utilities
Employees: 574
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Duke Energy Corporation

525 S Tryon St, Charlotte, 28202, US
Last Update: 2026-04-01
Between 800 and 849
http://www.duke-energy.com

Duke Energy, a Fortune 150 company headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., is one of America’s largest energy holding companies. The company’s electric utilities serve 8.4 million customers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Indiana, Ohio and Kentucky, and collectively own 54,800 megawatts of energy capacity. Its natural gas utilities serve 1.7 million customers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Ohio and Kentucky. Duke Energy is executing an ambitious clean energy transition, keeping reliability, affordability and accessibility at the forefront as the company works toward net-zero methane emissions from its natural gas business by 2030 and net-zero carbon emissions from electricity generation by 2050. The company is investing in major electric grid upgrades and cleaner generation, including expanded energy storage, renewables, natural gas and nuclear. Our team is available Monday to Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. EST. If you suspect an emergency, please call 911.

NAICS: 22
NAICS Definition: Utilities
Employees: 25,252
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bangladesh-power-development-board-bpdb.jpeg
Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB)
—
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
—
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
—
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
—
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
—
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
—
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/duke-energy-corporation.jpeg
Duke Energy Corporation
—
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
—
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
—
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
—
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
—
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
—
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB)
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Duke Energy Corporation
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Utilities Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) in 2026.

Incidents vs Utilities Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Duke Energy Corporation in 2026.

Incident History — Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Duke Energy Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Duke Energy Corporation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bangladesh-power-development-board-bpdb.jpeg
Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB)
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/duke-energy-corporation.jpeg
Duke Energy Corporation
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2024
Type:Cyber Attack
Motivation: Strategic dependencies and potential exploitation
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Duke Energy Corporation company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Duke Energy Corporation company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company has not reported any.

In the current year, Duke Energy Corporation company and Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation company nor Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation company nor Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Duke Energy Corporation company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company nor Duke Energy Corporation company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) nor Duke Energy Corporation holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Duke Energy Corporation company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company.

Duke Energy Corporation company employs more people globally than Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) company, reflecting its scale as a Utilities.

Neither Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) nor Duke Energy Corporation holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) nor Duke Energy Corporation holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) nor Duke Energy Corporation holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) nor Duke Energy Corporation holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) nor Duke Energy Corporation holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Bangladesh Power Development Board (BPDB) nor Duke Energy Corporation holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A security flaw has been discovered in itsourcecode Payroll Management System 1.0. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /manage_user.php of the component Parameter Handler. Performing a manipulation of the argument ID results in sql injection. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks.

Published
Date
2026-03-31
Updated
Date
2026-03-31
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
References
Description

A vulnerability was identified in Axiomatic Bento4 up to 1.6.0-641. Affected is the function AP4_BitReader::SkipBits of the file Ap4Dac4Atom.cpp of the component DSI v1 Parser. Such manipulation of the argument n_presentations leads to heap-based buffer overflow. The attack needs to be performed locally. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Published
Date
2026-03-31
Updated
Date
2026-03-31
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 4.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
References
Description

A vulnerability was determined in Axiomatic Bento4 up to 1.6.0-641. This impacts the function AP4_BitReader::ReadCache of the file Ap4Dac4Atom.cpp of the component MP4 File Parser. This manipulation causes heap-based buffer overflow. The attack needs to be launched locally. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Published
Date
2026-03-31
Updated
Date
2026-03-31
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 4.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
References
Description

iccDEV provides a set of libraries and tools for working with ICC color management profiles. Prior to version 2.3.1.6, there is a heap-buffer-overflow (HBO) in icAnsiToUtf8() in the XML conversion path. The issue is triggered by a crafted ICC profile which causes icAnsiToUtf8(std::string&, char const*) to treat an input buffer as a C-string and call operations that rely on strlen()/null-termination. AddressSanitizer reports an out-of-bounds READ of size 115 past a 114-byte heap allocation, with the failure observed while running the iccToXml tool. This issue has been patched in version 2.3.1.6.

Published
Date
2026-03-31
Updated
Date
2026-03-31
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References
Description

iccDEV provides a set of libraries and tools for working with ICC color management profiles. Prior to version 2.3.1.6, there is a stack-buffer-overflow (SBO) in CIccTagFixedNum<>::GetValues() and a related bug chain. The primary crash is an AddressSanitizer-reported WRITE of size 4 that overflows a 4-byte stack variable (rv) via the call chain CIccTagFixedNum::GetValues() -> CIccTagStruct::GetElemNumberValue(). This issue has been patched in version 2.3.1.6.

Published
Date
2026-03-31
Updated
Date
2026-03-31
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References