Comparison Overview

Atlas Copco Group

VS

AGCO Corporation

Atlas Copco Group

Sickla Industriväg 19, Stockholm, undefined, 10523, SE
Last Update: 2025-11-26

Atlas Copco Group enables technology that transforms the future. We innovate to develop products, services and solutions that are key to our customers’ success. Our four business areas offer compressed air and vacuum solutions, energy solutions, dewatering and industrial pumps, industrial power tools and assembly and machine vision solutions. In 2023, the Group had revenues of BSEK 173, and at year end about 53 000 employees.

NAICS: 333
NAICS Definition: Machinery Manufacturing
Employees: 43,624
Subsidiaries: 49
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

AGCO Corporation

4205 River Green Parkway, None, Duluth, Georgia, US, 30096
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 600 and 649

AGCO is a global leader in the design, manufacture and distribution of smart solutions for sustainable agriculture. Our portfolio is the most comprehensive in the ag industry, including a full line of tractors, combine harvesters, hay and forage equipment, seeding and tillage implements, grain storage and protein production systems. Our global team of more than 23,000 employees is passionate about serving the world's farmers and helping them sustainably feed the world’s growing population. Join us in putting farmers first and delivering high-impact solutions! http://blog.AGCOcorp.com https://www.facebook.com/AGCOcorp/ https://www.instagram.com/agcocorp http://www.twitter.com/AGCOcorp http://www.youtube.com/AGCOcorp

NAICS: 333
NAICS Definition: Machinery Manufacturing
Employees: 12,846
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/atlas-copco-group.jpeg
Atlas Copco Group
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/agco-corporation.jpeg
AGCO Corporation
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
Atlas Copco Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
AGCO Corporation
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Machinery Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Atlas Copco Group in 2025.

Incidents vs Machinery Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

AGCO Corporation has 0.0% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Atlas Copco Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Atlas Copco Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — AGCO Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AGCO Corporation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/atlas-copco-group.jpeg
Atlas Copco Group
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/agco-corporation.jpeg
AGCO Corporation
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 05/2022
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Malware Infection
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Atlas Copco Group company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to AGCO Corporation company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

AGCO Corporation company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Atlas Copco Group company has not reported any.

In the current year, AGCO Corporation company has reported more cyber incidents than Atlas Copco Group company.

AGCO Corporation company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Atlas Copco Group company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither AGCO Corporation company nor Atlas Copco Group company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither AGCO Corporation company nor Atlas Copco Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Atlas Copco Group company nor AGCO Corporation company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Atlas Copco Group nor AGCO Corporation holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Atlas Copco Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to AGCO Corporation company.

Atlas Copco Group company employs more people globally than AGCO Corporation company, reflecting its scale as a Machinery Manufacturing.

Neither Atlas Copco Group nor AGCO Corporation holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Atlas Copco Group nor AGCO Corporation holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Atlas Copco Group nor AGCO Corporation holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Atlas Copco Group nor AGCO Corporation holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Atlas Copco Group nor AGCO Corporation holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Atlas Copco Group nor AGCO Corporation holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H