Comparison Overview

Acrovision

VS

ROSS CONTROLS

Acrovision

London Road, Markyate, AL3 8JP, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

Acrovision offers the complete Sales and Technical solution to for your Automatic Identification needs. From product-only supply to replacement of full turnkey installed systems, supported with a comprehensive package of after-sales services. Our product range includes Barcode Readers – handheld and fixed position – 1D and 2D, Barcode Printers, RFID Systems, Industrial Sensors and Camera Vision products. We are partners and strongly supported by many of the Industries leading manufacturers. Acrovision specialises in the world of Direct Part Marking and Identification (DPMI). DPM technology offers many benefits including true 'Cradle to Grave'​ traceability leading to many leading companies and industries laying down specific regulations and requirements for their suppliers to directly mark items.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 11
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

ROSS CONTROLS

950 Woodward Heights, Ferndale, Michigan, 48220, US
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

Headquartered in Ferndale, Michigan, ROSS Controls® is an international manufacturer of pneumatic valves, controls systems, and safety products for the fluid power industry. Since being established in 1921, ROSS has always been one of the industry's strongest leaders in pneumatic valve technology. ROSS'​ focus is to continue to be a formidable competitor in key industries where its tailored technology offers customers a distinct value advantage. ROSS has ISO 9000 certified facilities and sales offices located in the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Japan. In addition, ROSS has dedicated sales offices in Brazil, France, India, and China, which are augmented by a worldwide network of 145 stocking distributors for a truly global customer service capability.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 162
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/acrovision.jpeg
Acrovision
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/ross-controls.jpeg
ROSS CONTROLS
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
Acrovision
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
ROSS CONTROLS
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Industrial Automation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Acrovision in 2025.

Incidents vs Industrial Automation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ROSS CONTROLS in 2025.

Incident History — Acrovision (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Acrovision cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — ROSS CONTROLS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ROSS CONTROLS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/acrovision.jpeg
Acrovision
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ross-controls.jpeg
ROSS CONTROLS
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ROSS CONTROLS company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Acrovision company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, ROSS CONTROLS company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Acrovision company.

In the current year, ROSS CONTROLS company and Acrovision company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither ROSS CONTROLS company nor Acrovision company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither ROSS CONTROLS company nor Acrovision company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither ROSS CONTROLS company nor Acrovision company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Acrovision company nor ROSS CONTROLS company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Acrovision nor ROSS CONTROLS holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Acrovision company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to ROSS CONTROLS company.

ROSS CONTROLS company employs more people globally than Acrovision company, reflecting its scale as a Industrial Automation.

Neither Acrovision nor ROSS CONTROLS holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Acrovision nor ROSS CONTROLS holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Acrovision nor ROSS CONTROLS holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Acrovision nor ROSS CONTROLS holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Acrovision nor ROSS CONTROLS holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Acrovision nor ROSS CONTROLS holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H