Comparison Overview

DS Smith

VS

JSW

DS Smith

1 Paddington Square, LONDON, W2 1DL, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-09
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.dssmith.com

DS Smith provides innovative packaging solutions, paper products and recycling services with a commitment to sustainability and a circular economy. Our core purpose is to Redefine Packaging for a Changing World, and our expert teams work closely with like-minded partners to incorporate renewable resources for products that minimize our environmental impact, reduce complexity and increase profitability through supply chain optimization.

NAICS: 30
NAICS Definition: Manufacturing
Employees: 13,059
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

JSW

Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai, Maharastra, 400051, IN
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799
http://www.jsw.in

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/ds-smith.jpeg
DS Smith
—
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
DS Smith
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 DS Smith in 2025.

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for JSW in 2025.

Incident History — DS Smith (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DS Smith 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/ds-smith.jpeg
DS Smith
Incidents

No Incident

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

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

FAQ

DS Smith 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 DS Smith company has not reported any.

In the current year, JSW company and DS Smith company have not reported any cyber incidents.

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

Neither JSW company nor DS Smith company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither JSW company nor DS Smith company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither DS Smith company nor JSW company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither DS Smith nor JSW holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

JSW company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to DS Smith company.

JSW company employs more people globally than DS Smith company, reflecting its scale as a Manufacturing.

Neither DS Smith nor JSW holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither DS Smith nor JSW holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither DS Smith nor JSW holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither DS Smith nor JSW holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither DS Smith nor JSW holds HIPAA certification.

Neither DS Smith nor JSW holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
References
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References