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

Comparison Overview

AMDAMD
VS
Applied MaterialsApplied Materials
AMD

AMD

2485 Augustine Drive, Santa Clara, 95054, US

Last Update: 10/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.amd.com
784/1000Fair

We care deeply about transforming lives with AMD technology to enrich our industry, our communities, and the world. Our mission is to build great products that accelerate next-generation computing experiences – the building blocks for the data center, artificial intelli...

NAICS:3344
NAICS Definition:Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Employees:47,977
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2
Applied Materials

Applied Materials

3050 Bowers Avenue, Santa Clara, CA, US, 95054

Last Update: 12/09/2026

View Profile
802/1000Good

Applied Materials is the leader in materials engineering solutions that are at the foundation of virtually every new semiconductor and advanced display in the world. The technology we create is essential to advancing AI and accelerating the commercialization of next-gen...

NAICS:3344
NAICS Definition:Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Employees:32,480
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AMD

AMD

-
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
Applied Materials

Applied Materials

-
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 Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

AMD has 25.0% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

Applied Materials has 1.96% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - AMD (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AMD cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Applied Materials (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Applied Materials cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
AMD

AMD

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
NVIAMD1789014785
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
AMDLIN1783614518
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
AMD1781267811
Applied Materials

Applied Materials

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
APPADV1771962047
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
APP106050824

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-96795
SUMMARY

Horilla is an HR and CRM software. Prior to 2.0.0, HorillaListView.export_data in horilla_views/generic/cbv/views.py accepts an authenticated user's columns POST parameter, takes field_tuple[1], interpolates it into dynamic_fn_str as Python source, and passes the generated function definition to exec(). A crafted string that remains valid under ast.literal_eval can inject Python syntax into a default argument evaluated during function definition, allowing arbitrary operating-system commands to execute with the application process privileges, including root privileges in the shipped Docker image. This issue is fixed in version 2.0.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-25
UPDATED
Date2026-09-25
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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86066
SUMMARY

Horilla is an HR and CRM software. Prior to 2.0.0, approve_validate_attendance_request at /attendance/approve-validate-attendance-request/ changes attendance_validated, is_validate_request_approved, approved_by, and related pending-request state through an HTTP GET before calling attendance.save(), so Django does not require CSRF validation for the action. An unauthenticated attacker can cause a logged-in manager with attendance.change_attendance to make a top-level request that carries the manager's SameSite=Lax session cookie, silently approving attendance with the victim's privileges and attributing the approval to the victim in the audit trail. This issue is fixed in version 2.0.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-25
UPDATED
Date2026-09-25
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-57449
SUMMARY

Actual is a local-first personal finance tool. Prior to 26.7.0, Actual Sync Server's CORS proxy is intended to let authenticated users fetch resources only from repositories listed in the official plugin allowlist. When `ACTUAL_GITHUB_TOKEN` is configured, the proxy automatically attaches the server's GitHub token to GitHub requests. The GitHub API allowlist check uses a raw `startsWith()` prefix test for `/repos/{owner}/{repo}` without requiring a path boundary after the repository name. If an allowlisted public plugin repository is `https://github.com/acme/plugin`, the proxy also accepts GitHub API URLs. Those URLs are outside the allowlisted repository but still pass because their API path starts with `/repos/acme/plugin`. The proxy then forwards the request with the server's `ACTUAL_GITHUB_TOKEN`, allowing any authenticated Actual user to read private GitHub resources reachable by that token. Version 26.7.0 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-25
UPDATED
Date2026-09-25
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-92842
SUMMARY

The convert.base64-encode, convert.quoted-printable-encode and convert.quoted-printable-decode stream filters accept a line-break-chars option whose length is tracked separately from the string itself. The filter constructors duplicate the value with pestrdup(), which stops at the first NUL byte, while keeping the original length. When the filter later emits a line break it copies the recorded length out of the truncated allocation, reading past its end and placing adjacent heap bytes into the filter output.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-25
UPDATED
Date2026-09-25
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-2026-91768
SUMMARY

The IPv6 branch of the FastCGI client access check compares only the first 12 bytes of a 16-byte IPv6 address, so listen.allowed_clients matches on a /96 prefix instead of the exact address. An attacker who can source an address sharing the first 96 bits with an allowed one passes the check and reaches the FastCGI endpoint.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-25
UPDATED
Date2026-09-25
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8