Comparison Overview

BAE Systems

VS

Indian Army

BAE Systems

BAE Systems, 6 Carlton Gardens, London, None, GB, SW1Y 5AD
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 800 and 849

At BAE Systems, we help our customers to stay a step ahead when protecting people and national security, critical infrastructure and vital information. We provide some of the world’s most advanced, technology-led defence, aerospace and security solutions and employ a skilled workforce of 107,000 people in more than 40 countries. From state of the art cyber threat detection to flight control systems that enable pilots to make better decisions, we never stop innovating to ensure that our customers maintain their advantage. This is a long-term commitment involving significant investments in skills. We also work closely with local partners to support economic development through the transfer of knowledge, skills and technology.

NAICS: 336414
NAICS Definition: Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 43,390
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Indian Army

IN, 110022
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 750 and 799

The Indian Army is the largest branch of the Indian Armed Forces and is responsible for land-based military operations. Its primary mission is the National Security and Defense of India from external aggression and threats, and maintaining peace and security within its borders. It also conducts humanitarian rescue operations during natural calamities and other disturbances. The Indian Army is one of the three services under the Ministry of Defence. The President of India is the Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Armed Forces, and thus of the Indian Army. The highest ranking military officer is the Chief of Army Staff (COAS), who is also a member of the Chiefs of Staff Committee. The Indian Army came into being at the Independence of India in 1947, and inherited most of the regiments and infrastructure of the British Indian Army that were located in post-partition India.

NAICS: 336414
NAICS Definition: Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 32,762
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/bae-systems.jpeg
BAE Systems
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/indian-army.jpeg
Indian Army
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
BAE Systems
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Indian Army
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BAE Systems in 2025.

Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Indian Army in 2025.

Incident History — BAE Systems (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BAE Systems cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Indian Army (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Indian Army cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bae-systems.jpeg
BAE Systems
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/indian-army.jpeg
Indian Army
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

BAE Systems company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Indian Army company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Indian Army company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to BAE Systems company.

In the current year, Indian Army company and BAE Systems company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Indian Army company nor BAE Systems company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Indian Army company nor BAE Systems company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Indian Army company nor BAE Systems company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither BAE Systems company nor Indian Army company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither BAE Systems nor Indian Army holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

BAE Systems company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Indian Army company.

BAE Systems company employs more people globally than Indian Army company, reflecting its scale as a Defense and Space Manufacturing.

Neither BAE Systems nor Indian Army holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither BAE Systems nor Indian Army holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither BAE Systems nor Indian Army holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither BAE Systems nor Indian Army holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither BAE Systems nor Indian Army holds HIPAA certification.

Neither BAE Systems nor Indian Army holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N