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

Comparison Overview

Avery Dennison SmartracAvery Dennison Smartrac
VS
MolexMolex
Avery Dennison Smartrac

Avery Dennison Smartrac

Willem Einthovenstraat 11, Oegstgeest, South Holland, NL, 2342

Last Update: 27/02/2026

View Profile
751/1000Fair

Digital journey. Digital transformation. Digital evolution. Call it what you will, but the fact is we’ve all been living on ‘planet digital’ for a good while now. That’s why it’s time to change the narrative of digital simply being a thing we do, when in reality it thre...

NAICS:335
NAICS Definition:Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing
Employees:656
Subsidiaries:10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Molex

Molex

2222 Wellington Court, Lisle, IL, US, 60532

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.molex.com
777/1000Fair

Molex makes a connected world possible by enabling technologies that transform the future and improve lives. With a presence in more than 40 countries, Molex offers a complete range of connectivity products, services and solutions for the data communications, medical, i...

NAICS:335
NAICS Definition:Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing
Employees:13,996
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Avery Dennison Smartrac

Avery Dennison Smartrac

-
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
Molex

Molex

-
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 Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Avery Dennison Smartrac in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Molex in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Avery Dennison Smartrac (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Avery Dennison Smartrac cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Molex (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Molex cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Avery Dennison Smartrac

Avery Dennison Smartrac

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Molex

Molex

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-56078
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains a path traversal vulnerability in MultiAgentMonitor that fails to sanitize agent IDs when building file paths. Attackers can include traversal sequences like ../ in agent IDs to read, write, or overwrite arbitrary files, enabling sensitive disclosure, denial of service, or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56077
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MultiAgentLedger component that allows attackers to access sensitive data by registering agents with duplicate IDs. Attackers can exploit the lack of agent ID uniqueness enforcement to share ledger instances and expose system prompts and conversation history between agents.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56076
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.128 contains a cross-origin agent execution vulnerability in the AGUI endpoint that allows remote attackers to trigger arbitrary agent execution. The POST /agui endpoint lacks authentication and hardcodes Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * headers, combined with Starlette's Content-Type-agnostic JSON parsing, enabling attackers to bypass CORS preflight checks via simple requests and exfiltrate sensitive agent responses including tool execution results and environment data.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56075
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 4.5.128 contains an arbitrary shell command execution vulnerability where the UI modules hardcode approval_mode to auto, overriding administrator configuration from PRAISON_APPROVAL_MODE environment variable. Authenticated attackers can instruct the LLM agent to execute arbitrary shell commands via subprocess.run with shell=True, bypassing the manual approval gate and insufficient command sanitization blocklists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56074
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8