Everbright Securities Company Cyber Security Posture
ebscn.comEverbright Securities Company Limited (SSE: 601788) is one of the largest securities brokerage by assets in China, controlled by state-owned financial conglomerate, China Everbright Group. It was founded in 1996 and is based in Shanghai. It was listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange in 2009 with capital raising of $10.96 billion yuan. It was the second IPO by a Chinese brokerage, following CITIC Securities in 2002. On 2 February 2015, Everbright Securities Co Ltd announced its agreement to buy Hong Kong conglomerate Sun Hung Kai & Co Ltd's 70 percent stake in its brokerage and wealth management service unit for HK$4.1 billion ($529 million). As of their June 2015 quarterly filing, Everbright ranks no. 2 of all Chinese companies for net increase from borrowings, net change in cash, and net cash and cash equivalents ending balance. Net cash and cash equivalents ending balance represented over 131% of Everbright's total market cap at the time.
Everbright Securities Company Details
everbright-securities
10,001+ employees
0
523
Investment Banking
ebscn.com
Scan still pending
EVE_3382260
In-progress
Everbright Securities Risk Score (AI oriented)Between 900 and 1000
This score is AI-generated and less favored by cyber insurers, who prefer the TPRM score.
Everbright Securities Global Score.png)
Everbright Securities Company Scoring based on AI Models
| Model Name | Date | Description | Current Score Difference | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AVERAGE-Industry | 03-12-2025 | This score represents the average cybersecurity rating of companies already scanned within the same industry. It provides a benchmark to compare an individual company's security posture against its industry peers. | N/A | Between 900 and 1000 |
Everbright Securities Company Cyber Security News & History
| Entity | Type | Severity | Impact | Seen | Url ID | Details | View |
|---|
Everbright Securities Company Subsidiaries
Everbright Securities Company Limited (SSE: 601788) is one of the largest securities brokerage by assets in China, controlled by state-owned financial conglomerate, China Everbright Group. It was founded in 1996 and is based in Shanghai. It was listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange in 2009 with capital raising of $10.96 billion yuan. It was the second IPO by a Chinese brokerage, following CITIC Securities in 2002. On 2 February 2015, Everbright Securities Co Ltd announced its agreement to buy Hong Kong conglomerate Sun Hung Kai & Co Ltd's 70 percent stake in its brokerage and wealth management service unit for HK$4.1 billion ($529 million). As of their June 2015 quarterly filing, Everbright ranks no. 2 of all Chinese companies for net increase from borrowings, net change in cash, and net cash and cash equivalents ending balance. Net cash and cash equivalents ending balance represented over 131% of Everbright's total market cap at the time.
Access Data Using Our API
Get company history
Rapid.png)
Everbright Securities Cyber Security News
China Politburo policy shift spurs surge in stocks, bonds
China Politburo policy shift spurs surge in stocks, bonds · Ten-year yield falls to record low · Hang Seng jumps to 1 month high. SHANGHAI/HONG ...
HKUST Collaborates with China Everbright Bank to Nurture Cyber Security Talent
The School of Business and Management of The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST Business School) joined hands with China ...
China Everbright Group Company Profile, Stock Price, News, Rankings
China Everbright Group · Ticker: · Company type:Private · Revenues ($M):$61,194 · Profits ($M):$3,708 · Market value ($M): · Number of employees ...
BRIEF-Everbright Securities Says Unit Warned By Regulator, To Improve The Unit's Governance
A beautiful Yellowstone coyote, but can you spot the other critter? It wasn't until later that I noticed a smaller critter in the image, ...
Everbridge Appoints Pamela Larson as Chief Security Officer for North America
Everbridge Appoints Pamela Larson as Chief Security Officer for North America · Corporate security and operational resilience expert joins the ...
Watchdog to boost regulations after Everbright's error
On Friday, Everbright Securities released a statement on its website saying that the trading error on Aug 16 caused 4.3 million yuan in losses.
China Everbright jumps on ownership structure revamp
China Everbright jumps on ownership structure revamp ... Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
Ride-hailing giant Didi to delist from New York Stock Exchange
Ride-hailing giant Didi to delist from New York Stock Exchange. Move comes after company ran afoul of Chinese authorities by pushing ahead with ...
China’s BYD opens its first commercial monorail
Mass transit is a hedge against the uneven fortunes of the electric car industry.
Everbright Securities Similar Companies
Al Baraka Group (ABG)
Al Baraka Group B.S.C. (c) is licensed as an Investment Business Firm – Category 1 (Islamic Principles) by the Central Bank of Bahrain. It is a leading international Islamic financial group providing financial services through its banking subsidiaries in 13 countries offering retail, corporate, trea
RBC Capital Markets
RBC Capital Markets is recognized by the most significant corporations, institutional investors, asset managers, private equity firms, and governments around the globe as an innovative, trusted partner with an in-depth expertise in capital markets, banking, and finance. We are well-established in th
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) on Cybersecurity Incidents
Everbright Securities CyberSecurity History Information
Total Incidents: According to Rankiteo, Everbright Securities has faced 0 incidents in the past.
Incident Types: As of the current reporting period, Everbright Securities has not encountered any cybersecurity incidents.
Total Financial Loss: The total financial loss from these incidents is estimated to be {total_financial_loss}.
Cybersecurity Posture: The company's overall cybersecurity posture is described as Everbright Securities Company Limited (SSE: 601788) is one of the largest securities brokerage by assets in China, controlled by state-owned financial conglomerate, China Everbright Group. It was founded in 1996 and is based in Shanghai. It was listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange in 2009 with capital raising of $10.96 billion yuan. It was the second IPO by a Chinese brokerage, following CITIC Securities in 2002. On 2 February 2015, Everbright Securities Co Ltd announced its agreement to buy Hong Kong conglomerate Sun Hung Kai & Co Ltd's 70 percent stake in its brokerage and wealth management service unit for HK$4.1 billion ($529 million). As of their June 2015 quarterly filing, Everbright ranks no. 2 of all Chinese companies for net increase from borrowings, net change in cash, and net cash and cash equivalents ending balance. Net cash and cash equivalents ending balance represented over 131% of Everbright's total market cap at the time..
Detection and Response: The company detects and responds to cybersecurity incidents through {description_of_detection_and_response_process}.
Incident Details
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Title: {Incident_Title}
Description: {Brief_description_of_the_incident}
Date Detected: {Detection_Date}
Date Publicly Disclosed: {Disclosure_Date}
Date Resolved: {Resolution_Date}
Type: {Type_of_Attack}
Attack Vector: {Attack_Vector}
Vulnerability Exploited: {Vulnerability}
Threat Actor: {Threat_Actor}
Motivation: {Motivation}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Title: {Incident_Title}
Description: {Brief_description_of_the_incident}
Date Detected: {Detection_Date}
Date Publicly Disclosed: {Disclosure_Date}
Date Resolved: {Resolution_Date}
Type: {Type_of_Attack}
Attack Vector: {Attack_Vector}
Vulnerability Exploited: {Vulnerability}
Threat Actor: {Threat_Actor}
Motivation: {Motivation}
Common Attack Types: As of now, the company has not encountered any reported incidents involving common cyberattacks.
Identification of Attack Vectors: The company identifies the attack vectors used in incidents through {description_of_identification_process}.
Impact of the Incidents
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Financial Loss: {Financial_Loss}
Data Compromised: {Data_Compromised}
Systems Affected: {Systems_Affected}
Downtime: {Downtime}
Operational Impact: {Operational_Impact}
Conversion Rate Impact: {Conversion_Rate_Impact}
Revenue Loss: {Revenue_Loss}
Customer Complaints: {Customer_Complaints}
Brand Reputation Impact: {Brand_Reputation_Impact}
Legal Liabilities: {Legal_Liabilities}
Identity Theft Risk: {Identity_Theft_Risk}
Payment Information Risk: {Payment_Information_Risk}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Financial Loss: {Financial_Loss}
Data Compromised: {Data_Compromised}
Systems Affected: {Systems_Affected}
Downtime: {Downtime}
Operational Impact: {Operational_Impact}
Conversion Rate Impact: {Conversion_Rate_Impact}
Revenue Loss: {Revenue_Loss}
Customer Complaints: {Customer_Complaints}
Brand Reputation Impact: {Brand_Reputation_Impact}
Legal Liabilities: {Legal_Liabilities}
Identity Theft Risk: {Identity_Theft_Risk}
Payment Information Risk: {Payment_Information_Risk}
Average Financial Loss: The average financial loss per incident is {average_financial_loss}.
Commonly Compromised Data Types: The types of data most commonly compromised in incidents are {list_of_commonly_compromised_data_types}.
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Entity Name: {Entity_Name}
Entity Type: {Entity_Type}
Industry: {Industry}
Location: {Location}
Size: {Size}
Customers Affected: {Customers_Affected}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Entity Name: {Entity_Name}
Entity Type: {Entity_Type}
Industry: {Industry}
Location: {Location}
Size: {Size}
Customers Affected: {Customers_Affected}
Response to the Incidents
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Incident Response Plan Activated: {Yes/No}
Third Party Assistance: {Yes/No}
Law Enforcement Notified: {Yes/No}
Containment Measures: {Containment_Measures}
Remediation Measures: {Remediation_Measures}
Recovery Measures: {Recovery_Measures}
Communication Strategy: {Communication_Strategy}
Adaptive Behavioral WAF: {Adaptive_Behavioral_WAF}
On-Demand Scrubbing Services: {On_Demand_Scrubbing_Services}
Network Segmentation: {Network_Segmentation}
Enhanced Monitoring: {Enhanced_Monitoring}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Incident Response Plan Activated: {Yes/No}
Third Party Assistance: {Yes/No}
Law Enforcement Notified: {Yes/No}
Containment Measures: {Containment_Measures}
Remediation Measures: {Remediation_Measures}
Recovery Measures: {Recovery_Measures}
Communication Strategy: {Communication_Strategy}
Adaptive Behavioral WAF: {Adaptive_Behavioral_WAF}
On-Demand Scrubbing Services: {On_Demand_Scrubbing_Services}
Network Segmentation: {Network_Segmentation}
Enhanced Monitoring: {Enhanced_Monitoring}
Incident Response Plan: The company's incident response plan is described as {description_of_incident_response_plan}.
Third-Party Assistance: The company involves third-party assistance in incident response through {description_of_third_party_involvement}.
Data Breach Information
Incident 2: Data Breach
Type of Data Compromised: {Type_of_Data}
Number of Records Exposed: {Number_of_Records}
Sensitivity of Data: {Sensitivity_of_Data}
Data Exfiltration: {Yes/No}
Data Encryption: {Yes/No}
File Types Exposed: {File_Types}
Personally Identifiable Information: {Yes/No}
Prevention of Data Exfiltration: The company takes the following measures to prevent data exfiltration: {description_of_prevention_measures}.
Handling of PII Incidents: The company handles incidents involving personally identifiable information (PII) through {description_of_handling_process}.
Ransomware Information
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Ransom Demanded: {Ransom_Amount}
Ransom Paid: {Ransom_Paid}
Ransomware Strain: {Ransomware_Strain}
Data Encryption: {Yes/No}
Data Exfiltration: {Yes/No}
Ransom Payment Policy: The company's policy on paying ransoms in ransomware incidents is described as {description_of_ransom_payment_policy}.
Data Recovery from Ransomware: The company recovers data encrypted by ransomware through {description_of_data_recovery_process}.
Regulatory Compliance
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Regulations Violated: {Regulations_Violated}
Fines Imposed: {Fines_Imposed}
Legal Actions: {Legal_Actions}
Regulatory Notifications: {Regulatory_Notifications}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Regulations Violated: {Regulations_Violated}
Fines Imposed: {Fines_Imposed}
Legal Actions: {Legal_Actions}
Regulatory Notifications: {Regulatory_Notifications}
Regulatory Frameworks: The company complies with the following regulatory frameworks regarding cybersecurity: {list_of_regulatory_frameworks}.
Ensuring Regulatory Compliance: The company ensures compliance with regulatory requirements through {description_of_compliance_measures}.
Lessons Learned and Recommendations
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Lessons Learned: {Lessons_Learned}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Lessons Learned: {Lessons_Learned}
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Recommendations: {Recommendations}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Recommendations: {Recommendations}
Key Lessons Learned: The key lessons learned from past incidents are {list_of_key_lessons_learned}.
Implemented Recommendations: The company has implemented the following recommendations to improve cybersecurity: {list_of_implemented_recommendations}.
References
Additional Resources: Stakeholders can find additional resources on cybersecurity best practices at {list_of_additional_resources}.
Investigation Status
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Investigation Status: {Investigation_Status}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Investigation Status: {Investigation_Status}
Communication of Investigation Status: The company communicates the status of incident investigations to stakeholders through {description_of_communication_process}.
Stakeholder and Customer Advisories
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Stakeholder Advisories: {Stakeholder_Advisories}
Customer Advisories: {Customer_Advisories}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Stakeholder Advisories: {Stakeholder_Advisories}
Customer Advisories: {Customer_Advisories}
Advisories Provided: The company provides the following advisories to stakeholders and customers following an incident: {description_of_advisories_provided}.
Initial Access Broker
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Entry Point: {Entry_Point}
Reconnaissance Period: {Reconnaissance_Period}
Backdoors Established: {Backdoors_Established}
High Value Targets: {High_Value_Targets}
Data Sold on Dark Web: {Yes/No}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Entry Point: {Entry_Point}
Reconnaissance Period: {Reconnaissance_Period}
Backdoors Established: {Backdoors_Established}
High Value Targets: {High_Value_Targets}
Data Sold on Dark Web: {Yes/No}
Monitoring and Mitigation of Initial Access Brokers: The company monitors and mitigates the activities of initial access brokers through {description_of_monitoring_and_mitigation_measures}.
Post-Incident Analysis
Incident 1: Ransomware Attack
Root Causes: {Root_Causes}
Corrective Actions: {Corrective_Actions}
Incident 2: Data Breach
Root Causes: {Root_Causes}
Corrective Actions: {Corrective_Actions}
Post-Incident Analysis Process: The company's process for conducting post-incident analysis is described as {description_of_post_incident_analysis_process}.
Corrective Actions Taken: The company has taken the following corrective actions based on post-incident analysis: {list_of_corrective_actions_taken}.
Additional Questions
General Information
Ransom Payment History: The company has {paid/not_paid} ransoms in the past.
Last Ransom Demanded: The amount of the last ransom demanded was {last_ransom_amount}.
Last Attacking Group: The attacking group in the last incident was {last_attacking_group}.
Incident Details
Most Recent Incident Detected: The most recent incident detected was on {most_recent_incident_detected_date}.
Most Recent Incident Publicly Disclosed: The most recent incident publicly disclosed was on {most_recent_incident_publicly_disclosed_date}.
Most Recent Incident Resolved: The most recent incident resolved was on {most_recent_incident_resolved_date}.
Impact of the Incidents
Highest Financial Loss: The highest financial loss from an incident was {highest_financial_loss}.
Most Significant Data Compromised: The most significant data compromised in an incident was {most_significant_data_compromised}.
Most Significant System Affected: The most significant system affected in an incident was {most_significant_system_affected}.
Response to the Incidents
Third-Party Assistance in Most Recent Incident: The third-party assistance involved in the most recent incident was {third_party_assistance_in_most_recent_incident}.
Containment Measures in Most Recent Incident: The containment measures taken in the most recent incident were {containment_measures_in_most_recent_incident}.
Data Breach Information
Most Sensitive Data Compromised: The most sensitive data compromised in a breach was {most_sensitive_data_compromised}.
Number of Records Exposed: The number of records exposed in the most significant breach was {number_of_records_exposed}.
Ransomware Information
Highest Ransom Demanded: The highest ransom demanded in a ransomware incident was {highest_ransom_demanded}.
Highest Ransom Paid: The highest ransom paid in a ransomware incident was {highest_ransom_paid}.
Regulatory Compliance
Highest Fine Imposed: The highest fine imposed for a regulatory violation was {highest_fine_imposed}.
Most Significant Legal Action: The most significant legal action taken for a regulatory violation was {most_significant_legal_action}.
Lessons Learned and Recommendations
Most Significant Lesson Learned: The most significant lesson learned from past incidents was {most_significant_lesson_learned}.
Most Significant Recommendation Implemented: The most significant recommendation implemented to improve cybersecurity was {most_significant_recommendation_implemented}.
References
Most Recent Source: The most recent source of information about an incident is {most_recent_source}.
Most Recent URL for Additional Resources: The most recent URL for additional resources on cybersecurity best practices is {most_recent_url}.
Investigation Status
Current Status of Most Recent Investigation: The current status of the most recent investigation is {current_status_of_most_recent_investigation}.
Stakeholder and Customer Advisories
Most Recent Stakeholder Advisory: The most recent stakeholder advisory issued was {most_recent_stakeholder_advisory}.
Most Recent Customer Advisory: The most recent customer advisory issued was {most_recent_customer_advisory}.
Initial Access Broker
Most Recent Entry Point: The most recent entry point used by an initial access broker was {most_recent_entry_point}.
Most Recent Reconnaissance Period: The most recent reconnaissance period for an incident was {most_recent_reconnaissance_period}.
Post-Incident Analysis
Most Significant Root Cause: The most significant root cause identified in post-incident analysis was {most_significant_root_cause}.
Most Significant Corrective Action: The most significant corrective action taken based on post-incident analysis was {most_significant_corrective_action}.
What Do We Measure?
Every week, Rankiteo analyzes billions of signals to give organizations a sharper, faster view of emerging risks. With deeper, more actionable intelligence at their fingertips, security teams can outpace threat actors, respond instantly to Zero-Day attacks, and dramatically shrink their risk exposure window.
These are some of the factors we use to calculate the overall score:
Identify exposed access points, detect misconfigured SSL certificates, and uncover vulnerabilities across the network infrastructure.
Gain visibility into the software components used within an organization to detect vulnerabilities, manage risk, and ensure supply chain security.
Monitor and manage all IT assets and their configurations to ensure accurate, real-time visibility across the company's technology environment.
Leverage real-time insights on active threats, malware campaigns, and emerging vulnerabilities to proactively defend against evolving cyberattacks.
