Comparison Overview

Duke Energy Corporation

VS

Centrica

Duke Energy Corporation

525 S Tryon St, Charlotte, North Carolina, 28202, US
Last Update: 2025-12-19
Between 800 and 849

Duke Energy, a Fortune 150 company headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., is one of America’s largest energy holding companies. The company’s electric utilities serve 8.4 million customers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Indiana, Ohio and Kentucky, and collectively own 54,800 megawatts of energy capacity. Its natural gas utilities serve 1.7 million customers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Ohio and Kentucky. Duke Energy is executing an ambitious clean energy transition, keeping reliability, affordability and accessibility at the forefront as the company works toward net-zero methane emissions from its natural gas business by 2030 and net-zero carbon emissions from electricity generation by 2050. The company is investing in major electric grid upgrades and cleaner generation, including expanded energy storage, renewables, natural gas and nuclear. Our team is available Monday to Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. EST. If you suspect an emergency, please call 911.

NAICS: 22
NAICS Definition: Utilities
Employees: 24,627
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Centrica

Maidenhead Road, Windsor, SL4 5GD, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Centrica is an international energy services and solutions company, founded on a 200-year heritage of serving customers in homes and businesses. We supply energy and services to over 10 million customers, mainly in the UK and Ireland, through brands such as British Gas, Bord Gáis Energy and Centrica Business Solutions. Through our trusted brands, we deliver innovative energy and services solutions to help solve customers’ needs, supported by thousands of engineers and technicians. We are committed to energising a greener, fairer future.

NAICS: 22
NAICS Definition: Utilities
Employees: 18,398
Subsidiaries: 9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/duke-energy-corporation.jpeg
Duke Energy Corporation
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/centrica.jpeg
Centrica
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
Duke Energy Corporation
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Centrica
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Utilities Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Duke Energy Corporation in 2025.

Incidents vs Utilities Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Centrica in 2025.

Incident History — Duke Energy Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Duke Energy Corporation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Centrica cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/duke-energy-corporation.jpeg
Duke Energy Corporation
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2024
Type:Cyber Attack
Motivation: Strategic dependencies and potential exploitation
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/centrica.jpeg
Centrica
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2020
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Ransomware
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2015
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Credential Stuffing
Motivation: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Duke Energy Corporation company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Centrica company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Centrica company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Duke Energy Corporation company.

In the current year, Centrica company and Duke Energy Corporation company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Centrica company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Duke Energy Corporation company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Centrica company nor Duke Energy Corporation company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Duke Energy Corporation company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Centrica company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation company nor Centrica company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation nor Centrica holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Centrica company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Duke Energy Corporation company.

Duke Energy Corporation company employs more people globally than Centrica company, reflecting its scale as a Utilities.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation nor Centrica holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation nor Centrica holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation nor Centrica holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation nor Centrica holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation nor Centrica holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Duke Energy Corporation nor Centrica holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Versions starting with 0.211.0 and prior to 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0 contain a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in their workflow expression evaluation system. Under certain conditions, expressions supplied by authenticated users during workflow configuration may be evaluated in an execution context that is not sufficiently isolated from the underlying runtime. An authenticated attacker could abuse this behavior to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the n8n process. Successful exploitation may lead to full compromise of the affected instance, including unauthorized access to sensitive data, modification of workflows, and execution of system-level operations. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0. Users are strongly advised to upgrade to a patched version, which introduces additional safeguards to restrict expression evaluation. If upgrading is not immediately possible, administrators should consider the following temporary mitigations: Limit workflow creation and editing permissions to fully trusted users only; and/or deploy n8n in a hardened environment with restricted operating system privileges and network access to reduce the impact of potential exploitation. These workarounds do not fully eliminate the risk and should only be used as short-term measures.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

FastAPI Users allows users to quickly add a registration and authentication system to their FastAPI project. Prior to version 15.0.2, the OAuth login state tokens are completely stateless and carry no per-request entropy or any data that could link them to the session that initiated the OAuth flow. `generate_state_token()` is always called with an empty `state_data` dict, so the resulting JWT only contains the fixed audience claim plus an expiration timestamp. On callback, the library merely checks that the JWT verifies under `state_secret` and is unexpired; there is no attempt to match the state value to the browser that initiated the OAuth request, no correlation cookie, and no server-side cache. Any attacker can hit `/authorize`, capture the server-generated state, finish the upstream OAuth flow with their own provider account, and then trick a victim into loading `.../callback?code=<attacker_code>&state=<attacker_state>`. Because the state JWT is valid for any client for \~1 hour, the victim’s browser will complete the flow. This leads to login CSRF. Depending on the app’s logic, the login CSRF can lead to an account takeover of the victim account or to the victim user getting logged in to the attacker's account. Version 15.0.2 contains a patch for the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
Description

FileZilla Client 3.63.1 contains a DLL hijacking vulnerability that allows attackers to execute malicious code by placing a crafted TextShaping.dll in the application directory. Attackers can generate a reverse shell payload using msfvenom and replace the missing DLL to achieve remote code execution when the application launches.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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

LDAP Tool Box Self Service Password 1.5.2 contains a password reset vulnerability that allows attackers to manipulate HTTP Host headers during token generation. Attackers can craft malicious password reset requests that generate tokens sent to a controlled server, enabling potential account takeover by intercepting and using stolen reset tokens.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/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

Kimai 1.30.10 contains a SameSite cookie vulnerability that allows attackers to steal user session cookies through malicious exploitation. Attackers can trick victims into executing a crafted PHP script that captures and writes session cookie information to a file, enabling potential session hijacking.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/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