Comparison Overview

Beusa Energy

VS

Chevron

Beusa Energy

undefined, undefined, undefined, 77380, US
Last Update: 2025-03-05 (UTC)
Between 800 and 900

Strong

Beusa Energy is an experienced management team focused on E&P Operations, Fracturing Services Operations, Turbine Power Solutions and Materials and Logistics Services in the U.S.

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 98
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Chevron

1400 Smith St, Houston, Texas, 77002, US
Last Update: 2025-05-06 (UTC)

Strong

Between 800 and 900

Our greatest resource is our people. Their ingenuity, creativity and collaboration have met the complex challenges of energyโ€™s past. Together, weโ€™ll take on the future. We support the LinkedIn Terms of Use (User Agreement), and we expect visitors to our page to do the same. We encourage open, lively conversation with a few simple rules: --We reserve the right to correct factual errors. --We will reply to comments when appropriate. --If we disagree with other opinions, we will do so respectfully. --You may not post anything that is spam or that is abusive, profane, or defamatory toward a person, entity, belief, or symbol. --We will delete any posts that contain personal information such as email addresses, phone numbers and physical addresses, and other third party intellectual property material, when that information does not belong to the author of the post. --You may not post job listings for non-Chevron positions. --While we support lively, open discussion, we reserve the right to delete comments.

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition: Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees: 49,879
Subsidiaries: 10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/beusa-energy.jpeg
Beusa Energy
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chevron.jpeg
Chevron
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
Beusa Energy
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Chevron
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Beusa Energy in 2025.

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Chevron in 2025.

Incident History โ€” Beusa Energy (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Beusa Energy cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Chevron (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chevron cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/beusa-energy.jpeg
Beusa Energy
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chevron.jpeg
Chevron
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Beusa Energy company and Chevron company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Chevron company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Beusa Energy company.

In the current year, Chevron company and Beusa Energy company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Chevron company nor Beusa Energy company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Chevron company nor Beusa Energy company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Chevron company nor Beusa Energy company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Beusa Energy company nor Chevron company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Chevron company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Beusa Energy company.

Chevron company employs more people globally than Beusa Energy company, reflecting its scale as a Oil and Gas.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

MinIO is a high-performance object storage system. In all versions prior to RELEASE.2025-10-15T17-29-55Z, a privilege escalation vulnerability allows service accounts and STS (Security Token Service) accounts with restricted session policies to bypass their inline policy restrictions when performing operations on their own account, specifically when creating new service accounts for the same user. The vulnerability exists in the IAM policy validation logic where the code incorrectly relied on the DenyOnly argument when validating session policies for restricted accounts. When a session policy is present, the system should validate that the action is allowed by the session policy, not just that it is not denied. An attacker with valid credentials for a restricted service or STS account can create a new service account for itself without policy restrictions, resulting in a new service account with full parent privileges instead of being restricted by the inline policy. This allows the attacker to access buckets and objects beyond their intended restrictions and modify, delete, or create objects outside their authorized scope. The vulnerability is fixed in version RELEASE.2025-10-15T17-29-55Z.

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

Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy. Envoy versions earlier than 1.36.2, 1.35.6, 1.34.10, and 1.33.12 contain a use-after-free vulnerability in the Lua filter. When a Lua script executing in the response phase rewrites a response body so that its size exceeds the configured per_connection_buffer_limit_bytes (default 1MB), Envoy generates a local reply whose headers override the original response headers, leaving dangling references and causing a crash. This results in denial of service. Updating to versions 1.36.2, 1.35.6, 1.34.10, or 1.33.12 fixes the issue. Increasing per_connection_buffer_limit_bytes (and for HTTP/2 the initial_stream_window_size) or increasing per_request_buffer_limit_bytes / request_body_buffer_limit can reduce the likelihood of triggering the condition but does not correct the underlying memory safety flaw.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

In Xpdf 4.05 (and earlier), a PDF object loop in a CMap, via the "UseCMap" entry, leads to infinite recursion and a stack overflow.

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

A vulnerability was identified in NucleoidAI Nucleoid up to 0.7.10. The impacted element is the function extension.apply of the file /src/cluster.ts of the component Outbound Request Handler. Such manipulation of the argument https/ip/port/path/headers leads to server-side request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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

HCL Traveler for Microsoft Outlook (HTMO) is susceptible to a credential leakage which could allow an attacker to access other computers or applications.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N