Comparison Overview

Ashok Leyland

VS

Rivian

Ashok Leyland

No.1 Sardar Patel Road, Guindy, Chennai, 600032, IN
Last Update: 2026-01-20
Between 750 and 799

Ashok Leyland vehicles have built a reputation for reliability and ruggedness. The 5,00,000 vehicles we have put on the roads have considerably eased the additional pressure placed on road transportation in independent India. In the populous Indian metros, four out of the five State Transport Undertaking (STU) buses come from Ashok Leyland. Some of them like the double-decker and vestibule buses are unique models from Ashok Leyland, tailor-made for high-density routes. The blueprint prepared for the future reflected the global ambitions of the company, captured in four words: Global Standards, Global Markets. This was at a time when liberalisation and globalisation were not yet in the air. Ashok Leyland embarked on a major product and process upgradation to match world-class standards of technology. In the journey towards global standards of quality, Ashok Leyland reached a major milestone in 1993 when it became the first in India's automobile history to win the ISO 9002 certification. The more comprehensive ISO 9001 certification came in 1994, QS 9000 in 1998 and ISO 14001 certification for all vehicle manufacturing units in 2002. It has also become the first Indian auto company to receive the latest ISO/TS 16949 Corporate Certification (in July 2006) which is specific to the auto industry.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 25,867
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Rivian

14600 Myford Rd, Irvine, 92606, US
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 750 and 799

Doing something different is never easy. It requires courage, optimism and grit. Core to our mission is building a team of adventurous individuals determined to make a positive impact on the world. This means challenging ourselves constantly. Stretching beyond the bounds of conventional thinking. Reframing old problems. Seeking new solutions. And operating comfortably in a space of uncertainty. While our backgrounds are diverse, our team shares a love of the outdoors and a desire to protect it for future generations. Do you like doing the impossible? We’d love to hear from you.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 11,798
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ashok-leyland.jpeg
Ashok Leyland
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/rivian.jpeg
Rivian
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
Ashok Leyland
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Rivian
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ashok Leyland in 2026.

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Rivian in 2026.

Incident History — Ashok Leyland (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ashok Leyland cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Rivian cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ashok-leyland.jpeg
Ashok Leyland
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rivian.jpeg
Rivian
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, Rivian company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Ashok Leyland company.

In the current year, Rivian company and Ashok Leyland company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Rivian company nor Ashok Leyland company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Rivian company nor Ashok Leyland company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Rivian company nor Ashok Leyland company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Ashok Leyland company nor Rivian company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Ashok Leyland nor Rivian holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Ashok Leyland company nor Rivian company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Ashok Leyland company employs more people globally than Rivian company, reflecting its scale as a Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.

Neither Ashok Leyland nor Rivian holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ashok Leyland nor Rivian holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ashok Leyland nor Rivian holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ashok Leyland nor Rivian holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ashok Leyland nor Rivian holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ashok Leyland nor Rivian holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

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

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N