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

Comparison Overview

Applied Materials JapanApplied Materials Japan
VS
Applied MaterialsApplied Materials
Applied Materials Japan

Applied Materials Japan

ヨコソーレインボータワー8階, 東京都港区海岸3-20-20 , undefined, 〒108-8444 , JP

Last Update: 09/03/2026

View Profile
754/1000Fair

イノベーションでよりよい未来を可能に。アプライド マテリアルズは、材料工学ソリューションのリーディングカンパニーです。原子レベル、産業規模で材料を改質する専門知識をもって、お客様が可能性を現実に変えるお手伝いをします。 アプライド マテリアルズ ジャパンは1979年に設立され、初めてアジアに進出しました。 半導体業界に関する話題で皆さんと交流できることを楽しみにしています。ご意見をお待ちしておりますが、当コミュニティにとって不快な環境となるコメントは削除させていただきます。ご了承ください。

NAICS:3344
NAICS Definition:Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Employees:75
Subsidiaries:13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Applied Materials

Applied Materials

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

Last Update: 30/07/2026

View Profile
801/1000Good

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
Applied Materials Japan

Applied Materials Japan

-
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)

No incidents recorded for Applied Materials Japan in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

Applied Materials has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

Applied Materials Japan 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...
Applied Materials Japan

Applied Materials Japan

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Applied Materials

Applied Materials

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
APPADV1771962047
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
APP106050824

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9