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

Comparison Overview

AGC Multi Material America, Inc.AGC Multi Material America, Inc.
VS
Midea GroupMidea Group
AGC Multi Material America, Inc.

AGC Multi Material America, Inc.

1420 W 12th Pl, Tempe, 85281, US

Last Update: 22/07/2026

View Profile
648/1000Poor

AGC Multi Material America, Inc. (AMMA) is a wholly owned subsidiary of AGC Inc., a $14 billion multinational corporation and one of the world’s largest manufacturers of glass, electronics, chemicals, and ceramic products. AMMA is a globally advanced materials company...

NAICS:335
NAICS Definition:Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing
Employees:32
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Midea Group

Midea Group

6 Midea Avenue, Foshan, Guangdong, CN

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.midea-group.com/
783/1000Fair

Midea Group aspires to the vision of “Bringing Great Innovations to Life”, upholding the Founders’ philosophy of creating a better life through technology. Midea Group has evolved into a global leading technology company specializing in six major businesses including Sm...

NAICS:335
NAICS Definition:Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing
Employees:18,947
Subsidiaries:19
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AGC Multi Material America, Inc.

AGC Multi Material America, Inc.

-
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
Midea Group

Midea Group

-
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 Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

AGC Multi Material America, Inc. has 47.64% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Midea Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - AGC Multi Material America, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AGC Multi Material America, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Midea Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Midea Group 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...
AGC Multi Material America, Inc.

AGC Multi Material America, Inc.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
AGC1784745318
Midea Group

Midea Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1