Comparison Overview

CETEST

VS

R.T. Moore

CETEST

Lazkaibar, s/n, Beasain, 20200, ES
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

YOUR TEST AND EVALUATION DEPARTMENT. ANYWHERE, ANYTIME. Cetest is a fully accredited independent test laboratory offering services for design verification, model validation, developmental testing and/or answers to help you identify failure root causes. Structural integrity and fatigue testing, system dynamics, modal analysis, vibrations, noise, EMC, etc Experts in Test and Evaluation with more than 40 years of experience, we carry out our test services in our facilities and test benches as well as on site as required by customer needs. We are fully accredited to international standards: ISO 17025 for test and calibration laboratories, EN 9100 for the aerospace sector, as well as to ISO 9001 and ISO14001 for quality and environmental management systems. .

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 293
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

R.T. Moore

6340 La Pas Trail, Indianapolis, IN, 46268, US
Last Update: 2025-11-14
Between 750 and 799

For 65 years, family owned and operated R.T. Moore has been a leader in plumbing, HVAC, sewer, water and service for commercial and residential projects. With home bases in Indiana, Ohio and Florida, R.T. Moore is one of the most trusted names in the industry today, offering mechanical contracting services to multifamily and residential facilities in more than 20 states. Company philosophy: Do what's right, be honest and fair, understand our customers'​ needs and concerns. Creat value, earn loyalty, develop strong relationships. communicate accurately and timely, honor commitments, and show appreciation.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 228
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/cetest.jpeg
CETEST
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/r-t--moore.jpeg
R.T. Moore
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
CETEST
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
R.T. Moore
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CETEST in 2025.

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for R.T. Moore in 2025.

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

CETEST cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — R.T. Moore (X = Date, Y = Severity)

R.T. Moore cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cetest.jpeg
CETEST
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/r-t--moore.jpeg
R.T. Moore
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both CETEST company and R.T. Moore company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, R.T. Moore company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to CETEST company.

In the current year, R.T. Moore company and CETEST company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither R.T. Moore company nor CETEST company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither R.T. Moore company nor CETEST company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither R.T. Moore company nor CETEST company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither CETEST company nor R.T. Moore company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither CETEST nor R.T. Moore holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither CETEST company nor R.T. Moore company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

CETEST company employs more people globally than R.T. Moore company, reflecting its scale as a Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering.

Neither CETEST nor R.T. Moore holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither CETEST nor R.T. Moore holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither CETEST nor R.T. Moore holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither CETEST nor R.T. Moore holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither CETEST nor R.T. Moore holds HIPAA certification.

Neither CETEST nor R.T. Moore 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