Comparison Overview
Amphenol
Amphenol
358 Hall Ave, Wallingford, Connecticut, 06492, US
Last Update: 29/03/2026
Amphenol is one of the largest manufacturers on the planet you’ve never heard of. Founded in 1932 and headquartered out of Connecticut, Amphenol is a Fortune 500 company with more than 90,000 employees throughout the world. Our products are a key ingredient in the elect...
Delta Electronics
瑞光路, 內湖區, 114, TW
Last Update: 23/09/2026
Delta is a global innovative provider of switching power supplies and DC brushless fans, as well as a major source for power management solutions, components, visual displays, industrial automation, networking products, and renewable energy solutions. Delta Group has sa...
Compliance Ranges Comparison
Amphenol
Delta Electronics
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Amphenol in 2026.
Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
Delta Electronics has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Amphenol (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Amphenol cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Delta Electronics (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Delta Electronics cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents
Amphenol
Delta Electronics
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 5.0.0 through 5.0.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to exposure of session tokens in the HTML response.
IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 5.0.0 through 5.0.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to an XML external entity (XXE) injection flaw.
IBM Aspera Enterprise WebApps 1.0.0 through 1.0.6 could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.
IBM Planning Analytics 2.0, and 2.1 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a stack-based buffer overflow.
IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 can allow a man-in-the-middle attacker to present a forged TLS certificate, intercept the connection, and capture the IAM bearer Authorization header automatically attached by the session adapter. The captured token grants full platform-scope tenant API access, enabling the attacker to read and manipulate the victim's DataStage projects, flows, assets, and pipeline definitions. This is client-side SDK code running on the user's own machine, so exploitation requires an external network interceptor rather than a co-tenant in the shared cluster.