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

Comparison Overview

AmgenAmgen
VS
ICON plcICON plc
Amgen

Amgen

One Amgen Center Drive, Thousand Oaks, 91320, US

Last Update: 11/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.amgen.com
796/1000Fair

Amgen harnesses the best of biology and technology to fight the world’s toughest diseases, and make people’s lives easier, fuller and longer. We helped establish the biotechnology industry, and we remain on the cutting-edge of innovation, using technology and human gene...

NAICS:541714
NAICS Definition:Research and Development in Biotechnology (except Nanobiotechnology)
Employees:39,128
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1
ICON plc

ICON plc

ICON plc, South County Business Park, Leopardstown, Dublin, IE, D18 X5R3

Last Update: 12/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.iconplc.com
797/1000Fair

Since our foundation in Dublin, Ireland in 1990, our mission has been to help our clients to accelerate the development of drugs and devices that save lives and improve quality of life. We do this by delivering best in class information, solutions and performance, with ...

NAICS:541714
NAICS Definition:Research and Development in Biotechnology (except Nanobiotechnology)
Employees:35,356
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Amgen

Amgen

-
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
ICON plc

ICON plc

-
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)

Amgen has 17.36% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Biotechnology Research Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ICON plc in 2026.

Incidents

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

Amgen cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - ICON plc (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ICON plc 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...
Amgen

Amgen

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
AMGCEN1785529893
🔒 Incident : Breach
AMG552072825
ICON plc

ICON plc

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-85893
SUMMARY

Use after free in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-69486
SUMMARY

Heap-based buffer overflow in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2025-11395
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Podman. If an attacker can pass a crafted tar archive to the `podman load` command, they can create files on the host machine with the privileges of the user running Podman.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-92259
SUMMARY

Integer overflow or wraparound vulnerability in Samsung Opensource Escargot allows attackers with write access to the bytecode-cache directory to cause a heap-based buffer overflow and denial of service via a crafted cache file. This issue affects Escargot: ac94df78493ee6fede286620d94f724e46b4d238.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-92257
SUMMARY

Netcore NR255-V version 1.5.130703 contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability in L7 content management pages that use eval() sinks, affecting the call board text and policy group handling components. Attackers can inject persistent script payloads through these pages to have malicious code executed in the context of other users viewing the affected content.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-15
UPDATED
Date2026-09-15
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3