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

Comparison Overview

Alcoa® Wheels AustraliaAlcoa® Wheels Australia
VS
SBB CFF FFSSBB CFF FFS
Alcoa® Wheels Australia

Alcoa® Wheels Australia

18 Law Ct, Sunshine West, 3020, AU

Last Update: 25/01/2026

View Profile
755/1000Fair

Alcoa® Wheels is a product brand of Howmet Aerospace, manufactured by Howmet Wheel Systems. We are a worldwide producer of forged aluminium wheels and accessories for trucks, trailers and buses with our Australian distribution headquarters located in Melbourne. We...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
SBB CFF FFS

SBB CFF FFS

Hilfikerstrasse 1, Bern, 3000, CH

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.sbb.ch/jobs
783/1000Fair

We shape the mobility of the future – simple, personal, connected. SBB’s comprehensive service contract allows us to offer a wide range of exciting careers in all areas of business. Thanks to this variety, many different career paths are possible, which we support th...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:17,994
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Alcoa® Wheels Australia

Alcoa® Wheels Australia

-
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
SBB CFF FFS

SBB CFF FFS

-
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 Transportation/Trucking/Railroad Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Alcoa® Wheels Australia in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Transportation/Trucking/Railroad Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for SBB CFF FFS in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Alcoa® Wheels Australia (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Alcoa® Wheels Australia 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 - SBB CFF FFS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SBB CFF FFS 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...
Alcoa® Wheels Australia

Alcoa® Wheels Australia

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
SBB CFF FFS

SBB CFF FFS

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-45537
SUMMARY

OpenSIPS is a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) server implementation. In versions prior to 3.6.6 and 4.0.0-rc1, the construct_uri() function concatenates multiple URI components (protocol, username, domain, port, params) into a fixed 1024-byte global BSS buffer without any bounds checking. When a routing script calls construct_uri() with an attacker-controlled username, a combined component length exceeding 1024 bytes overflows the buffer, corrupting adjacent global data with attacker-controlled content. The overflow reaches disable_503_translation, a global flag controlling SIP 503 response handling, allowing an attacker to deterministically set the flag via the URI username and alter the server's routing behavior for subsequent messages. Because the same buffer is shared with contact_builder(), the overflow also corrupts that function's data, and without a memory sanitizer the adjacent globals are silently overwritten on every request containing a long username. This issue has been fixed in versions 3.6.6 and 4.0.0-rc1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-04
UPDATED
Date2026-08-04
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-2026-18819
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in RackTables up to 0.22.0/e5fff9f8aab339798ed47e8c6d7d977ed97a82bd. This vulnerability affects unknown code. The manipulation leads to cross-site request forgery. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The project maintainer confirms: "[I]t seems plausible, in that RackTables does not at this time have any CSRF prevention. You may assign a CVE ID to this, but there is no guarantee it will be handled in urgent, or even timely, manner, or at all."

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-04
UPDATED
Date2026-08-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-18818
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Ehco1996 django-sspanel up to 2023.12.26. This affects the function TicketDetailView of the file apps/sspanel/views.py of the component Support Ticket Handler. Executing a manipulation can lead to authorization bypass. The attack can be executed remotely. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-04
UPDATED
Date2026-08-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-70620
SUMMARY

Odysseus before commit 87babb5 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability that allows admin-privileged attackers to direct the server to probe internal network resources by supplying arbitrary URLs to the embedding endpoint configuration without scheme, host, IP range, or DNS rebind validation. Attackers can submit loopback addresses, RFC 1918 ranges, or link-local addresses through the embedding endpoint API to partially read responses from cloud instance metadata services, internal APIs, and other hosts reachable from the server.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-04
UPDATED
Date2026-08-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-70619
SUMMARY

Odysseus before commit bf325f6 contains a missing authorization vulnerability that allows authenticated non-admin users to manage server-wide embedding backend configuration by invoking endpoint management routes that verify session authentication but omit the admin authorization guard. Attackers can supply an attacker-controlled URL to overwrite the embedding backend persisted in the endpoint configuration file and process environment, causing all subsequent embedding operations including chat messages, RAG queries, memory entries, and vault text to be transmitted in plaintext to the attacker-controlled destination, or delete the endpoint configuration to deny embedding service to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-04
UPDATED
Date2026-08-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8