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

Comparison Overview

Cement Ożarów S.A.Cement Ożarów S.A.
VS
Travis Perkins plcTravis Perkins plc
Cement Ożarów S.A.

Cement Ożarów S.A.

Karsy 77, Ożarów, Świętokrzyskie, 27-530, PL

Last Update: 21/01/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.ozarow.com.pl
747/1000Moderate

Cement Ożarów S.A. jest czołowym producentem cementów powszechnego użytku oraz specjalnych, a także spoiwa hydraulicznego. Oferuje rozwiązania dla zrównoważonego budownictwa o wysokiej jakości oraz stabilności. Spółka zaopatruje różne segmenty budownictwa – począwszy od...

NAICS:4233
NAICS Definition:Lumber and Other Construction Materials Merchant Wholesalers
Employees:103
Subsidiaries:27
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Travis Perkins plc

Travis Perkins plc

Ryehill House, Rye Hill Close, Northampton, NN5 7UA, GB

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
753/1000Fair

Travis Perkins plc is the UK’s largest distributor of building materials to trade customers. The breadth, reach and scale of our business means we are in a unique position to provide customers with the building materials and tools they need for their projects, when and ...

NAICS:4233
NAICS Definition:Lumber and Other Construction Materials Merchant Wholesalers
Employees:12,742
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Cement Ożarów S.A.

Cement Ożarów S.A.

-
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
Travis Perkins plc

Travis Perkins plc

-
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 Wholesale Building Materials Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Cement Ożarów S.A. in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Wholesale Building Materials Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Travis Perkins plc in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Cement Ożarów S.A. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cement Ożarów S.A. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Travis Perkins plc (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Travis Perkins plc 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...
Cement Ożarów S.A.

Cement Ożarów S.A.

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Travis Perkins plc

Travis Perkins plc

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. company and Travis Perkins plc company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. and Travis Perkins plc, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. and Travis Perkins plc, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Cement Ożarów S.A. or Travis Perkins plc ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Cement Ożarów S.A. or Travis Perkins plc ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. and Travis Perkins plc, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Cement Ożarów S.A. and Travis Perkins plc, 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