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

Comparison Overview

BushnellBushnell
VS
PT Indofood Sukses Makmur TbkPT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk
Bushnell

Bushnell

9200 Cody, Overland Park, Kansas, 66214, US

Last Update: 27/10/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.bushnell.com
761/1000Fair

Bushnell Outdoor Products has been the industry leader in sports optics and outdoor accessories for more than 60 years. The company’s family of brands include Bushnell, Butler Creek, Final Approach, Hoppe’s, Millett, Simmons, Stoney Point, Tasco, Uncle Mike's, Uncle Mi...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:156
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk

PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk

Jakarta, 12910, ID

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.indofood.com
773/1000Fair

Over a number of decades PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk has been progressively transformed to become a Total Food Solutions company with operations in all stages of food manufacturing from the production of raw materials and their processing through to consumer products ...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:17,134
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Bushnell

Bushnell

-
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
PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk

PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk

-
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 Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bushnell in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk in 2026.

Incidents

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

Bushnell cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk 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...
Bushnell

Bushnell

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk

PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2