Comparison Overview

Airbus

VS

Pratt & Whitney

Airbus

BP 90112, None, Blagnac Cedex, None, FR, 31703
Last Update: 2025-12-11
View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.airbus.com

Airbus pioneers sustainable aerospace for a safe and united world. The Company constantly innovates to provide efficient and technologically-advanced solutions in aerospace, defence, and connected services. In commercial aircraft, Airbus designs and manufactures modern and fuel-efficient airliners and associated services. Airbus is also a European leader in space systems, defence and security. In helicopters, Airbus provides efficient civil and military rotorcraft solutions and services worldwide.

NAICS: 3364
NAICS Definition: Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing
Employees: 81,999
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
View Profile

Pratt & Whitney

400 Main Street, None, East Hartford, CT, US, 06108
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799
https://prattwhitney.com/

Pratt & Whitney, an RTX business, is a global leader in propulsion systems, powering the most advanced aircraft in the world, and we are shaping the future of aviation. Our engines help connect people, grow economies and defend freedom. Our customers depend on us to get where they’re going and back again.

NAICS: 3364
NAICS Definition: Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing
Employees: 27,741
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/airbusgroup.jpeg
Airbus
—
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/pratt-&-whitney.jpeg
Pratt & Whitney
—
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
Airbus
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Pratt & Whitney
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Aviation and Aerospace Component Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Airbus has 29.87% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Aviation and Aerospace Component Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Pratt & Whitney in 2025.

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

Airbus cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Pratt & Whitney (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pratt & Whitney cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/airbusgroup.jpeg
Airbus
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Improper handling of null bytes in the Wing FTP Server’s web interface
Motivation: Gain complete control over the system
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pratt-&-whitney.jpeg
Pratt & Whitney
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2023
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Airbus company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Pratt & Whitney company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Airbus and Pratt & Whitney have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Airbus company has reported more cyber incidents than Pratt & Whitney company.

Neither Pratt & Whitney company nor Airbus company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Pratt & Whitney company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Airbus company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Pratt & Whitney company nor Airbus company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Airbus company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Pratt & Whitney company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Airbus nor Pratt & Whitney holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Airbus company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Pratt & Whitney company.

Airbus company employs more people globally than Pratt & Whitney company, reflecting its scale as a Aviation and Aerospace Component Manufacturing.

Neither Airbus nor Pratt & Whitney holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Airbus nor Pratt & Whitney holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Airbus nor Pratt & Whitney holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Airbus nor Pratt & Whitney holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Airbus nor Pratt & Whitney holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Airbus nor Pratt & Whitney holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References