Comparison Overview

DS Smith

VS

Reckitt

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

Reckitt

103-105 Bath Road, None, Slough, Berkshire, GB, SL1 3UH
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 800 and 849
http://www.reckitt.com

Every day, in everything we do, our purpose is to protect, heal and nurture in the relentless pursuit of a cleaner, healthier world. And we have a fight on our hands. A fight to make access to the highest quality hygiene, wellness and nourishment a right and not a privilege. Each of our products is designed to do exactly this. Our well-loved brands have been making a difference to people’s daily lives around the world for more than 200 years. Brands including: Durex, Dettol, Enfamil, Nurofen, Strepsils, Gaviscon, Mucinex, Nutramigen, Lysol, Harpic, Cillit Bang, Finish and Vanish. By 2030, our ambition is to reach half of the world, every year. We’re a growing global community of over 43,000 people on a journey of transformation and sustainable growth. Together, our success will continue to positively impact communities everywhere, for a healthier planet and a fairer society. Want to learn more about us? Visit reckitt.com

NAICS: 30
NAICS Definition: Manufacturing
Employees: 33,689
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
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/reckitt.jpeg
Reckitt
—
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
Reckitt
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 Reckitt in 2025.

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

DS Smith cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Reckitt 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/reckitt.jpeg
Reckitt
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Reckitt company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas DS Smith company has not reported any.

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

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

Reckitt company has disclosed at least one data breach, while DS Smith company has not reported such incidents publicly.

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

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

Neither DS Smith nor Reckitt holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

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

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

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

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

Neither DS Smith nor Reckitt holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither DS Smith nor Reckitt holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither DS Smith nor Reckitt holds HIPAA certification.

Neither DS Smith nor Reckitt 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