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

Comparison Overview

Agilent BrasilAgilent Brasil
VS
Charles River LaboratoriesCharles River Laboratories
Agilent Brasil

Agilent Brasil

Alameda Araguaia 1142, Barueri, 06455-000, BR

Last Update: 21/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.agilent.com/
756/1000Fair

Transformamos laboratórios que transformam o mundo. Fundada em 1999, a Agilent apoia cientistas de 110 países em pesquisas de ponta em ciências biológicas, diagnóstico do paciente e testes necessários para garantir a segurança da água, alimentos e produtos farmacêutico...

NAICS:541714
NAICS Definition:Research and Development in Biotechnology (except Nanobiotechnology)
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Charles River Laboratories

Charles River Laboratories

251 Ballardvale Street, Wilmington, Massachusetts, US, 01887

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://criver.com
776/1000Fair

At Charles River, we are guided by our strong purpose—to create healthier lives—which centers around the patients who rely on the therapeutics we help to develop, the animals in our care, to our planet, and to the passionate and skilled people who are at the heart of ou...

NAICS:541714
NAICS Definition:Research and Development in Biotechnology (except Nanobiotechnology)
Employees:14,867
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Agilent Brasil

Agilent Brasil

-
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
Charles River Laboratories

Charles River Laboratories

-
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 Biotechnology Research Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Agilent Brasil in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Biotechnology Research Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Charles River Laboratories in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Agilent Brasil (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Agilent Brasil cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Charles River Laboratories (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Charles River Laboratories 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...
Agilent Brasil

Agilent Brasil

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Charles River Laboratories

Charles River Laboratories

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9