Comparison Overview

DS Smith

VS

Prysmian

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

Prysmian

Via Chiese 6, Milan, 20126, IT
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799
http://www.prysmian.com

Prysmian is a global cabling solutions provider leading the energy transition and digital transformation. By leveraging its wide geographical footprint and extensive product range, its track record of technological leadership and innovation, and a strong customer base, the company is well-placed to capitalise on its leading positions and win in new, growing markets. Prysmian’s business strategy perfectly matches key market drivers by developing resilient, high-performing, sustainable and innovative cable solutions in the segments of Transmission, Power Grid, Electrification and Digital Solutions. Prysmian is a public company listed on the Italian Stock Exchange, with almost 150 years of experience, over 33,000 employees, 109 plants and 27 R&D centres in over 50 countries, and sales of over €15 billion in 2023.

NAICS: 30
NAICS Definition: Manufacturing
Employees: 14,379
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

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/prysmian.jpeg
Prysmian
—
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
Prysmian
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 Prysmian in 2025.

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

DS Smith cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Prysmian 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/prysmian.jpeg
Prysmian
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Prysmian company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to DS Smith company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Prysmian company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to DS Smith company.

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

Neither Prysmian company nor DS Smith company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

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

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

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

Neither DS Smith nor Prysmian holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Both Prysmian company and DS Smith company have a similar number of subsidiaries worldwide.

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

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

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

Neither DS Smith nor Prysmian holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither DS Smith nor Prysmian holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither DS Smith nor Prysmian holds HIPAA certification.

Neither DS Smith nor Prysmian 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