Comparison Overview

Broadcom

VS

Microchip Technology Inc.

Broadcom

3401 Hillview Ave, Palo Alto, California, US, 94304
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 700 and 749

A global infrastructure technology leader built on more than 60 years of innovation, collaboration and engineering excellence.

NAICS: 3344
NAICS Definition: Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Employees: 53,946
Subsidiaries: 15
12-month incidents
4
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Microchip Technology Inc.

undefined, Chandler, AZ, undefined, US
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 650 and 699

Microchip Technology Inc. is a leading semiconductor supplier of smart, connected and secure embedded control solutions. Its easy-to-use development tools and comprehensive product portfolio enable customers to create optimal designs which reduce risk while lowering total system cost and time to market. The company’s solutions serve more than 125,000 customers across the industrial, automotive, consumer, aerospace and defense, communications and computing markets. Headquartered in Chandler, Arizona, Microchip offers outstanding technical support along with dependable delivery and quality. For more information, visit the Microchip website at www.microchip.com.

NAICS: 3344
NAICS Definition: Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Employees: 17,487
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/broadcom.jpeg
Broadcom
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/microchip-technology.jpeg
Microchip Technology Inc.
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
Broadcom
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Microchip Technology Inc.
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Broadcom has 545.16% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Microchip Technology Inc. has 61.29% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Broadcom cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Microchip Technology Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Microchip Technology Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/broadcom.jpeg
Broadcom
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Unauthenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Zero-Day Exploit (CVE-2025-61882, CVE-2025-21884), Unauthenticated HTTP Requests, Data Exfiltration
Motivation: Financial Gain (Ransomware Extortion)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: supply chain attack, third-party compromise (payroll provider partner)
Motivation: financial gain (ransomware)
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/microchip-technology.jpeg
Microchip Technology Inc.
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Remote Code Execution, Email Phishing, Phone Calls
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2023
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Email, Telephone
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Broadcom company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Microchip Technology Inc. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Broadcom company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Microchip Technology Inc. company.

In the current year, Broadcom company has reported more cyber incidents than Microchip Technology Inc. company.

Both Microchip Technology Inc. company and Broadcom company have confirmed experiencing at least one ransomware attack.

Broadcom company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Microchip Technology Inc. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Microchip Technology Inc. company nor Broadcom company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Broadcom company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Microchip Technology Inc. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Broadcom nor Microchip Technology Inc. holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Broadcom company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Microchip Technology Inc. company.

Broadcom company employs more people globally than Microchip Technology Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Semiconductor Manufacturing.

Neither Broadcom nor Microchip Technology Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Broadcom nor Microchip Technology Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Broadcom nor Microchip Technology Inc. holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Broadcom nor Microchip Technology Inc. holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Broadcom nor Microchip Technology Inc. holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Broadcom nor Microchip Technology Inc. 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