Comparison Overview

Design Air

VS

BF Engineering GmbH

Design Air

120 Route 59, Hillburn, 10931, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Design Air, Inc is a fully functioning HVAC company. We have been a part of the HVAC industry for 26 years and we are located in Hillburn, NY. We specialize in Heating and Air Conditioning. We do everything from installation right to regularly servicing your unit. We also offer 24 hour service, which really separates us from most of the other local HVAC companies. We pride ourselves on our quick response and courteous employees. We won't leave your home or business until you are 100% satisfied!

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 48
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

BF Engineering GmbH

Sudetenstraße 92, Geretsried, Bavaria, DE, 82538
Last Update: 2025-11-27

BF-Engineering ist Spezialist für die Planung, Fertigung und Realisation von Sonnensimulationsanlagen und industrieller Bestrahlungstechnik. BFE ist in Geretsried, ca. 40 km südlich von München, ansässig. BFE is the worldmarket leader in the area of solar simulation and specialist for crash test lighting. The BF Group in the background offers a wide range of resources. In spring 2017 BF Engineering was merged with BF Maschinen to develop further areas in the testing market. The range of products has been extended in mechanical engineering (test rig systems) and software development with 30 new employees. The main customers are from the automotive, military, railway and aerospace industries. BFE is able to design and manufacture any kind of lighting & mechanical system you need for your testing facility.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 17
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/design-air.jpeg
Design Air
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/bfengineering.jpeg
BF Engineering GmbH
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
Design Air
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
BF Engineering GmbH
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 Design Air in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for BF Engineering GmbH in 2025.

Incident History — Design Air (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Design Air cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — BF Engineering GmbH (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BF Engineering GmbH cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/design-air.jpeg
Design Air
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bfengineering.jpeg
BF Engineering GmbH
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Design Air company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to BF Engineering GmbH company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, BF Engineering GmbH company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Design Air company.

In the current year, BF Engineering GmbH company and Design Air company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither BF Engineering GmbH company nor Design Air company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither BF Engineering GmbH company nor Design Air company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither BF Engineering GmbH company nor Design Air company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Design Air company nor BF Engineering GmbH company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Design Air nor BF Engineering GmbH holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Design Air company nor BF Engineering GmbH company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Design Air company employs more people globally than BF Engineering GmbH company, reflecting its scale as a Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering.

Neither Design Air nor BF Engineering GmbH holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Design Air nor BF Engineering GmbH holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Design Air nor BF Engineering GmbH holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Design Air nor BF Engineering GmbH holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Design Air nor BF Engineering GmbH holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Design Air nor BF Engineering GmbH 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