Comparison Overview
Charles River Laboratories

Charles River Laboratories
251 Ballardvale Street, Wilmington, Massachusetts, US, 01887
Last Update: 11/09/2026
At Charles River, we are guided by our strong purpose—to create healthier lives—which centers around the patients who rely on the therapeutics we help to develop, the animals in our care, to our planet, and to the passionate and skilled people who are at the heart of ou...

Agilent Technologies
5301 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Santa Clara, 95051, US
Last Update: 11/09/2026
Agilent customers are finding new ways to treat cancer, ensure food, water, air, and medicine quality and safety, discover new drug treatments, research infectious diseases, and create alternative energy solutions for a greener planet. From start to finish, we have them...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Charles River Laboratories







Agilent Technologies






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Biotechnology Research Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Charles River Laboratories in 2026.
Incidents vs Biotechnology Research Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Agilent Technologies in 2026.
Incident History - Charles River Laboratories (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Charles River Laboratories cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Agilent Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Agilent Technologies cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Charles River Laboratories

Agilent Technologies
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.
An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.
The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.
An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.
A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.