Comparison Overview

Apollo Gold Corp

VS

Tata Steel

Apollo Gold Corp

5655 S Yosemite St # 200, None, Greenwood Vlg, Colorado, US, 80111-3220
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 700 and 749

Apollo Gold Corp is a mining & metals company based out of 5655 S Yosemite St # 200, Greenwood Vlg, Colorado, United States.

NAICS: 212
NAICS Definition: Mining (except Oil and Gas)
Employees: 4
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Tata Steel

Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street, Mumbai, Maharashtra, IN, 400001
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 800 and 849

Tata Steel group is among the top global steel companies with an annual crude steel capacity of 34 million tonnes per annum. It is one of the world's most geographically-diversified steel producers, with operations and commercial presence across the world. The group (excluding SEA operations) recorded a consolidated turnover of US $19.7 billion in the financial year ending March 31, 2020. A Great Place to Work-CertifiedTM organisation, Tata Steel Ltd., together with its subsidiaries, associates and joint ventures, is spread across five continents with an employee base of over 65,000. Tata Steel has been a part of the DJSI Emerging Markets Index since 2012 and has been consistently ranked amongst top 5 steel companies in the DJSI Corporate Sustainability Assessment since 2016. Besides being a member of ResponsibleSteelTM and worldsteel’s Climate Action Programme, Tata Steel has won several awards and recognitions including the World Economic Forum’s Global Lighthouse recognition for its Kalinganagar Plant - a first in India, and Prime Minister’s Trophy for the best performing integrated steel plant for 2016-17. The Company, ranked as India’s most valuable Metals & Mining brand by Brand Finance, received the ‘Honourable Mention’ at the National CSR Awards 2019, Steel Sustainability Champion 2019 by worldsteel, CII Greenco Star Performer Award 2019, ‘Most Ethical Company’ award 2020 from Ethisphere Institute, Best Risk Management Framework & Systems Award (2020) by CNBC TV-18, and Award for Excellence in Financial Reporting FY20 by ICAI, among several others. To know more, visit www.tatasteel.com and www.wealsomaketomorrow.com.

NAICS: 212
NAICS Definition: Mining (except Oil and Gas)
Employees: 52,316
Subsidiaries: 80
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/apollo-gold-corp.jpeg
Apollo Gold Corp
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tatasteelltd.jpeg
Tata Steel
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Apollo Gold Corp
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Tata Steel
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mining Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Apollo Gold Corp in 2025.

Incidents vs Mining Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tata Steel in 2025.

Incident History — Apollo Gold Corp (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Apollo Gold Corp cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Tata Steel (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tata Steel cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/apollo-gold-corp.jpeg
Apollo Gold Corp
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2024
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Compromised wireless pagers
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tatasteelltd.jpeg
Tata Steel
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Motivation: Financial Gain, Disruption
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Phishing Emails, Spoofed Supplier Communications, WhatsApp Scams, Human Error (Misplaced Trust)
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Theft, Reputational Damage, Exploitation of Human Behavior
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Tata Steel company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Apollo Gold Corp company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Tata Steel company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Apollo Gold Corp company.

In the current year, Tata Steel company has reported more cyber incidents than Apollo Gold Corp company.

Tata Steel company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Apollo Gold Corp company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Tata Steel company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Apollo Gold Corp company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Tata Steel company and Apollo Gold Corp company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither Apollo Gold Corp company nor Tata Steel company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Apollo Gold Corp nor Tata Steel holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Tata Steel company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Apollo Gold Corp company.

Tata Steel company employs more people globally than Apollo Gold Corp company, reflecting its scale as a Mining.

Neither Apollo Gold Corp nor Tata Steel holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Apollo Gold Corp nor Tata Steel holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Apollo Gold Corp nor Tata Steel holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Apollo Gold Corp nor Tata Steel holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Apollo Gold Corp nor Tata Steel holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Apollo Gold Corp nor Tata Steel holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

HedgeDoc is an open source, real-time, collaborative, markdown notes application. Prior to 1.10.4, some of HedgeDoc's OAuth2 endpoints for social login providers such as Google, GitHub, GitLab, Facebook or Dropbox lack CSRF protection, since they don't send a state parameter and verify the response using this parameter. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.10.4.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

Langflow versions up to and including 1.6.9 contain a chained vulnerability that enables account takeover and remote code execution. An overly permissive CORS configuration (allow_origins='*' with allow_credentials=True) combined with a refresh token cookie configured as SameSite=None allows a malicious webpage to perform cross-origin requests that include credentials and successfully call the refresh endpoint. An attacker-controlled origin can therefore obtain fresh access_token / refresh_token pairs for a victim session. Obtained tokens permit access to authenticated endpoints — including built-in code-execution functionality — allowing the attacker to execute arbitrary code and achieve full system compromise.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
Description

A vulnerability was detected in xerrors Yuxi-Know up to 0.4.0. This vulnerability affects the function OtherEmbedding.aencode of the file /src/models/embed.py. Performing manipulation of the argument health_url results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The patch is named 0ff771dc1933d5a6b78f804115e78a7d8625c3f3. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch. The vendor responded with a vulnerability confirmation and a list of security measures they have established already (e.g. disabled URL parsing, disabled URL upload mode, removed URL-to-markdown conversion).

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.8
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 4.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/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
Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in Rarlab RAR App up to 7.11 Build 127 on Android. This affects an unknown part of the component com.rarlab.rar. Such manipulation leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. Attacks of this nature are highly complex. It is indicated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. Upgrading to version 7.20 build 128 is able to mitigate this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor responded very professional: "This is the real vulnerability affecting RAR for Android only. WinRAR and Unix RAR versions are not affected. We already fixed it in RAR for Android 7.20 build 128 and we publicly mentioned it in that version changelog. (...) To avoid confusion among users, it would be useful if such disclosure emphasizes that it is RAR for Android only issue and WinRAR isn't affected."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.1
Severity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 2.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
Description

A weakness has been identified in ZSPACE Q2C NAS up to 1.1.0210050. Affected by this issue is the function zfilev2_api.OpenSafe of the file /v2/file/safe/open of the component HTTP POST Request Handler. This manipulation of the argument safe_dir causes command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 9.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.4
Severity: 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: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