Comparison Overview

Austest Laboratories

VS

King Tester Corporation

Austest Laboratories

2/9 Packard Ave, Castle Hill, New South Wales, 2154, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Austest provides fast and economical product/component testing and approval services for a huge range of electrical products and industries ranging from Defence & Aerospace to Commercial and Medical. We are an independent, full service approvals company encompassing Product Safety standards testing, EMC, Telecommunications, Energy Efficiency & Environmental testing through to Product Certification. Austest provides Approval and Compliance Folder services to achieve certification in many countries, ranging from our Australian RCM agent services, New Zealand Radio Spectrum Management Compliance Folder services, Asian approval services including China, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam, through to CE Mark DoC services for Europe and Latin-South American approvals.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 24
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

King Tester Corporation

308 Schell Ln, Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, 19460, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Founded in 1936 by Andrew King, King Tester Corporation is a leader in portable Brinell testing solutions. King Tester has solidified itself as the industry standard by providing the best and most accurate portable Brinell testing equipment around the world for the past 88 years. We hold ourselves to the highest standards of quality and reliability while continuing to provide customers with the only Brinell Metal Hardness testing product and accessories that consistently meet expectations. Call us for all your metallurgical testing equipment needs at 610-279-6010.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 17
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/austest-laboratories.jpeg
Austest Laboratories
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/king-tester-corporation.jpeg
King Tester 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
Austest Laboratories
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
King Tester Corporation
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Austest Laboratories in 2025.

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for King Tester Corporation in 2025.

Incident History — Austest Laboratories (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Austest Laboratories cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

King Tester Corporation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/austest-laboratories.jpeg
Austest Laboratories
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/king-tester-corporation.jpeg
King Tester Corporation
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Austest Laboratories company and King Tester Corporation company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, King Tester Corporation company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Austest Laboratories company.

In the current year, King Tester Corporation company and Austest Laboratories company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither King Tester Corporation company nor Austest Laboratories company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither King Tester Corporation company nor Austest Laboratories company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither King Tester Corporation company nor Austest Laboratories company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Austest Laboratories company nor King Tester Corporation company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Austest Laboratories nor King Tester Corporation holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Austest Laboratories company nor King Tester Corporation company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Austest Laboratories company employs more people globally than King Tester Corporation company, reflecting its scale as a Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering.

Neither Austest Laboratories nor King Tester Corporation holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Austest Laboratories nor King Tester Corporation holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Austest Laboratories nor King Tester Corporation holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Austest Laboratories nor King Tester Corporation holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Austest Laboratories nor King Tester Corporation holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Austest Laboratories nor King Tester 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