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

Comparison Overview

AntwerpXLAntwerpXL
VS
Hapag-Lloyd AGHapag-Lloyd AG
AntwerpXL

AntwerpXL

Jan van Rijswijcklaan 191, Antwerp, 2020, BE

Last Update: 19/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.antwerpxl.com/
762/1000Fair

AXL is all about supporting, connecting, and shaping the future of the breakbulk logistics market. Visitors can expect to find suppliers from across the world who offer reliable, flexible, and cost-effective solutions. With over 3,800+ attendees, AXL provides a vibrant...

NAICS:483
NAICS Definition:Water Transportation
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:122
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Hapag-Lloyd AG

Hapag-Lloyd AG

Ballindamm 25, Hamburg, DE, 20095

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.hapag-lloyd.com
797/1000Fair

About Hapag-Lloyd With a fleet of 313 modern container ships and a total transport capacity of 2.5 million TEU, Hapag-Lloyd is one of the world’s leading liner shipping companies. In the Liner Shipping segment, the Company has around 14,000 employees and 400 offices in ...

NAICS:483
NAICS Definition:Water Transportation
Employees:15,039
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AntwerpXL

AntwerpXL

-
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
Hapag-Lloyd AG

Hapag-Lloyd AG

-
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 Maritime Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AntwerpXL in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Maritime Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hapag-Lloyd AG in 2026.

Incidents

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

AntwerpXL 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 - Hapag-Lloyd AG (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hapag-Lloyd AG 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...
AntwerpXL

AntwerpXL

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Hapag-Lloyd AG

Hapag-Lloyd AG

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
HAP508092125

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-81203
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Simple Online Food Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=login2. The manipulation of the argument email leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-80158
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in the ipa_getkeytab module of the community.general Ansible collection. The module's bind_pw parameter, used to supply the LDAP simple-bind password when retrieving a Kerberos keytab, is not declared with no_log, unlike the sibling password parameter in the same module. As a consequence, the supplied IPA/LDAP bind password is recorded in cleartext in the managed host's system journal/syslog (the module's "Invoked with" record), is included in the module's return values and verbose (-v) output, and is displayed in Automation Controller / AWX job output. The password is additionally passed on the command line to the ipa-getkeytab helper (as --bindpw <value>), exposing it in the process list to local users while the command runs. An attacker able to read these logs, job output, or the process table can obtain the directory bind credential, potentially compromising the accounts and objects that credential can access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
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:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-75340
SUMMARY

The device metadata import interface /device/instance/{productId}/property-metadata/import of jetlinks community 2.11 is vulnerable to Server-side request forgery (SSRF).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75338
SUMMARY

disconf (Distributed Configuration Management Platform) 2.6.36 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control. The config-fetching APIs /api/config/item, /api/config/file, /api/config/list and /api/config/simple/list are exposed without authentication. The LoginInterceptor explicitly whitelists these four paths, so any anonymous attacker can read every configuration item and configuration file managed by the config center.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75336
SUMMARY

Funiture 1.0.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the backend tool interfaces /sys/tool/select.json and /sys/tool/update.json.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA