Comparison Overview

Aselsan

VS

Thales

Aselsan

296. Cadde 16, Mehmet Akif Ersoy, Ankara, 06200, TR
Last Update: 2025-12-19
Between 750 and 799

ASELSAN is a company of Turkish Armed Forces Foundation, established in 1975 in order to meet the communication needs of the Turkish Armed Forces by national means. Currently ​74,20% of the shares are owned by the Foundation whereas the remaining 25,8% runs in İstanbul Borsa stock market. ASELSAN is the largest defense electronics company of Turkey whose capability/product portfolio comprises communication and information technologies, radar and electronic warfare, electro-optics, avionics, unmanned systems, land, naval and weapon systems, air defence and missile systems, command and control systems, transportation, security, traffic, automation and medical systems. Today ASELSAN has become an indigenous products exporting company, investing in international markets through various cooperation models with local partners and listed as one of the top 100 defence companies of the world (Defense News Top 100).

NAICS: 336414
NAICS Definition: Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 16,729
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Thales

6, Rue de la Verrerie, Meudon, Île-de-France, FR, 92190
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Thales (Euronext Paris: HO) is a global leader in advanced technologies for the Defence, Aerospace, and Cyber & Digital sectors. Its portfolio of innovative products and services addresses several major challenges: sovereignty, security, sustainability and inclusion. The Group invests more than €4 billion per year in Research & Development in key areas, particularly for critical environments, such as Artificial Intelligence, cybersecurity, quantum and cloud technologies. Thales has more than 83,000 employees in 68 countries. In 2024, the Group generated sales of €20.6 billion.

NAICS: 336414
NAICS Definition: Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 67,535
Subsidiaries: 10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
4

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aselsan.jpeg
Aselsan
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/thales.jpeg
Thales
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
Aselsan
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Thales
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Aselsan has 33.33% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Thales in 2025.

Incident History — Aselsan (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Aselsan cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Thales (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Thales cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aselsan.jpeg
Aselsan
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Spear-phishing email with malicious .url file
Motivation: Cyber espionage
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/thales.jpeg
Thales
Incidents

Date Detected: 04/2023
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Malicious Code Injection
Motivation: National Security Disruption, Economic Instability
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2022
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Data theft and extortion
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unknown
Motivation: Extortion
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Aselsan company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Thales company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Thales company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Aselsan company.

In the current year, Aselsan company has reported more cyber incidents than Thales company.

Thales company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Aselsan company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Thales company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Aselsan company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Thales company and Aselsan company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither Aselsan company nor Thales company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Aselsan nor Thales holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Thales company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Aselsan company.

Thales company employs more people globally than Aselsan company, reflecting its scale as a Defense and Space Manufacturing.

Neither Aselsan nor Thales holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Aselsan nor Thales holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Aselsan nor Thales holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Aselsan nor Thales holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Aselsan nor Thales holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Aselsan nor Thales holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Versions starting with 0.211.0 and prior to 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0 contain a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in their workflow expression evaluation system. Under certain conditions, expressions supplied by authenticated users during workflow configuration may be evaluated in an execution context that is not sufficiently isolated from the underlying runtime. An authenticated attacker could abuse this behavior to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the n8n process. Successful exploitation may lead to full compromise of the affected instance, including unauthorized access to sensitive data, modification of workflows, and execution of system-level operations. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0. Users are strongly advised to upgrade to a patched version, which introduces additional safeguards to restrict expression evaluation. If upgrading is not immediately possible, administrators should consider the following temporary mitigations: Limit workflow creation and editing permissions to fully trusted users only; and/or deploy n8n in a hardened environment with restricted operating system privileges and network access to reduce the impact of potential exploitation. These workarounds do not fully eliminate the risk and should only be used as short-term measures.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

FastAPI Users allows users to quickly add a registration and authentication system to their FastAPI project. Prior to version 15.0.2, the OAuth login state tokens are completely stateless and carry no per-request entropy or any data that could link them to the session that initiated the OAuth flow. `generate_state_token()` is always called with an empty `state_data` dict, so the resulting JWT only contains the fixed audience claim plus an expiration timestamp. On callback, the library merely checks that the JWT verifies under `state_secret` and is unexpired; there is no attempt to match the state value to the browser that initiated the OAuth request, no correlation cookie, and no server-side cache. Any attacker can hit `/authorize`, capture the server-generated state, finish the upstream OAuth flow with their own provider account, and then trick a victim into loading `.../callback?code=<attacker_code>&state=<attacker_state>`. Because the state JWT is valid for any client for \~1 hour, the victim’s browser will complete the flow. This leads to login CSRF. Depending on the app’s logic, the login CSRF can lead to an account takeover of the victim account or to the victim user getting logged in to the attacker's account. Version 15.0.2 contains a patch for the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
Description

FileZilla Client 3.63.1 contains a DLL hijacking vulnerability that allows attackers to execute malicious code by placing a crafted TextShaping.dll in the application directory. Attackers can generate a reverse shell payload using msfvenom and replace the missing DLL to achieve remote code execution when the application launches.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
Description

LDAP Tool Box Self Service Password 1.5.2 contains a password reset vulnerability that allows attackers to manipulate HTTP Host headers during token generation. Attackers can craft malicious password reset requests that generate tokens sent to a controlled server, enabling potential account takeover by intercepting and using stolen reset tokens.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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
Description

Kimai 1.30.10 contains a SameSite cookie vulnerability that allows attackers to steal user session cookies through malicious exploitation. Attackers can trick victims into executing a crafted PHP script that captures and writes session cookie information to a file, enabling potential session hijacking.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/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