Comparison Overview

AYERIA

VS

Civil Engineer

AYERIA

Avenida Averroes, 8 Bajo 11 Sevilla, Andalucía 41020, ES
Last Update: 2025-03-16 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799

Ayeria nace en el año 2009 y está formada por un grupo de profesionales con una media de más de 15 de años de experiencia al Servicio de la Ingeniería. El principal objetivo de nuestra empresa es proveer a nuestros clientes de servicios especializados, usando para ello tecnología de vanguardia y la experiencia de profesionales muy cualificados. Nuestra gestión está enmarcada dentro del compromiso de calidad, integridad, rapidez y eficacia. ¿Que ofrecemos?. Cartografía. Topografía de proyectos. Asistencias Técnicas a Obra. Venta y alquiler de aparatos de Topografía.

NAICS: 237
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 11-50
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Civil Engineer

undefined, New York, undefined, undefined, US
Last Update: 2025-03-04 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799

A civil engineer is a person who practices civil engineering – the application of planning, designing, constructing, maintaining, and operating infrastructures while protecting the public and environmental health, as well as improving existing infrastructures that have been neglected. Civil engineering is one of the oldest engineering disciplines because it deals with constructed environment including planning, designing, and overseeing construction and maintenance of building structures, and facilities, such as roads, railroads, airports, bridges, harbors, channels, dams, irrigation projects, pipelines, power plants, and water and sewage systems. ------------------------------------------------------------------- If you want you, your company or products/content to be featured on our page, fill up this 𝗚𝗼𝗼𝗴𝗹𝗲 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺 (https://forms.gle/jCqprbdF9yyvKTWc7) in detail or 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝘂𝘀 𝗮𝘁 [email protected].

NAICS: 237
NAICS Definition: Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Employees: 15,270
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/ayeria.jpeg
AYERIA
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/civil-engineer.jpeg
Civil Engineer
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
AYERIA
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Civil Engineer
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Civil Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AYERIA in 2025.

Incidents vs Civil Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Civil Engineer in 2025.

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

AYERIA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Civil Engineer (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Civil Engineer cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ayeria.jpeg
AYERIA
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/civil-engineer.jpeg
Civil Engineer
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, Civil Engineer company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to AYERIA company.

In the current year, Civil Engineer company and AYERIA company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Civil Engineer company nor AYERIA company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Civil Engineer company nor AYERIA company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Civil Engineer company nor AYERIA company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither AYERIA company nor Civil Engineer company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither AYERIA nor Civil Engineer holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither AYERIA company nor Civil Engineer company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Civil Engineer company employs more people globally than AYERIA company, reflecting its scale as a Civil Engineering.

Neither AYERIA nor Civil Engineer holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither AYERIA nor Civil Engineer holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither AYERIA nor Civil Engineer holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither AYERIA nor Civil Engineer holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither AYERIA nor Civil Engineer holds HIPAA certification.

Neither AYERIA nor Civil Engineer holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Deck Mate 1 executes firmware directly from an external EEPROM without verifying authenticity or integrity. An attacker with physical access can replace or reflash the EEPROM to run arbitrary code that persists across reboots. Because this design predates modern secure-boot or signed-update mechanisms, affected systems should be physically protected or retired from service. The vendor has not indicated that firmware updates are available for this legacy model.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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

Deck Mate 2 lacks a verified secure-boot chain and runtime integrity validation for its controller and display modules. Without cryptographic boot verification, an attacker with physical access can modify or replace the bootloader, kernel, or filesystem and gain persistent code execution on reboot. This weakness allows long-term firmware tampering that survives power cycles. The vendor indicates that more recent firmware updates strengthen update-chain integrity and disable physical update ports to mitigate related attack avenues.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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

Deck Mate 2's firmware update mechanism accepts packages without cryptographic signature verification, encrypts them with a single hard-coded AES key shared across devices, and uses a truncated HMAC for integrity validation. Attackers with access to the update interface - typically via the unit's USB update port - can craft or modify firmware packages to execute arbitrary code as root, allowing persistent compromise of the device's integrity and deck randomization process. Physical or on-premises access remains the most likely attack path, though network-exposed or telemetry-enabled deployments could theoretically allow remote exploitation if misconfigured. The vendor confirmed that firmware updates have been issued to correct these update-chain weaknesses and that USB update access has been disabled on affected units.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS bc-fips on All (API modules), Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java LTS bcprov-lts8on on All (API modules) allows Excessive Allocation. This vulnerability is associated with program files core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCMSIV.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA224NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA3NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHAKENativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA512NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA384NativeDigest.Java. This issue affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS: from 2.1.0 through 2.1.1; Bouncy Castle for Java LTS: from 2.73.0 through 2.73.7.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/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:P/AU:N/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:Amber
Description

Wasmtime is a runtime for WebAssembly. In versions from 38.0.0 to before 38.0.3, the implementation of component-model related host-to-wasm trampolines in Wasmtime contained a bug where it's possible to carefully craft a component, which when called in a specific way, would crash the host with a segfault or assert failure. Wasmtime 38.0.3 has been released and is patched to fix this issue. There are no workarounds.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/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