Comparison Overview

Cevital SPA

VS

JSW

Cevital SPA

Illot D, N° 6 ZHUN Garidi II, Kouba Alger, 16005, DZ
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

Fondé en 1998, le groupe Cevital oeuvre pour le rayonnement et le développement de l’économie algérienne en intervenant dans des domaines variés par le biais de ses quatre pôles : le pôle agro-industrie et distribution, le pôle automotive, immobilier et services, le pôle industrie, ainsi que le pôle verre, fenêtres et fermetures. Le groupe est le fleuron du secteur privé algérien avec des activités très diversifiées et tournées vers l’export. Cevital est le premier employeur privé en Algérie et compte aujourd’hui plus de 18 000 collaborateurs qui travaillent quotidiennement à son expansion tant en Algérie qu’à l’international. Show more Show less

NAICS: 30
NAICS Definition: Manufacturing
Employees: 10,001
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

JSW

Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai, Maharastra, 400051, IN
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

At JSW, we believe innovation has the power to make the world #BetterEveryday. As a US$ 24 billion group, ranked among India’s leading business houses, we drive economic growth across sectors like Steel, Energy, Infrastructure, Cement, Paints, Green Mobility, Defence, Sports, and more. Our commitment to sustainable development includes becoming carbon neutral by 2050, building stronger infrastructure, and producing eco-friendly materials. Through our diverse workforce of 40,000 employees across India, the USA, Europe, and Africa, and initiatives led by the JSW Foundation, we are focused on improving lives, empowering communities, and bringing positive transformation to every life we touch. We combine excellence in execution, cutting-edge technologies, and a passion for sustainable growth to make a lasting difference and help make lives #BetterEveryday.

NAICS: 30
NAICS Definition: Manufacturing
Employees: 32,664
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cevital-spa.jpeg
Cevital SPA
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/jswgroup.jpeg
JSW
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
Cevital SPA
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
JSW
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Cevital SPA in 2025.

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for JSW in 2025.

Incident History — Cevital SPA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cevital SPA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

JSW cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cevital-spa.jpeg
Cevital SPA
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jswgroup.jpeg
JSW
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2020
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Cevital SPA company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to JSW company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

JSW company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Cevital SPA company has not reported any.

In the current year, JSW company and Cevital SPA company have not reported any cyber incidents.

JSW company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Cevital SPA company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither JSW company nor Cevital SPA company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither JSW company nor Cevital SPA company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Cevital SPA company nor JSW company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Cevital SPA nor JSW holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

JSW company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Cevital SPA company.

JSW company employs more people globally than Cevital SPA company, reflecting its scale as a Manufacturing.

Neither Cevital SPA nor JSW holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Cevital SPA nor JSW holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Cevital SPA nor JSW holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Cevital SPA nor JSW holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Cevital SPA nor JSW holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Cevital SPA nor JSW 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