Comparison Overview

Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd.

VS

Apple

Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd.

鹤边路29号, GuangZhou, 510430, CN
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd.. was formally established in 2011 and has a complete R&D, production base and sales network. The company specializes in R&D, production and sales of various polymer film materials, which are mainly used in nearly ten different fields such as mobile phone screen protectors, biomedical testing films, automotive vehicle clothing films, and construction engineering films. The company has more than 100 employees, 40% of which are R&D personnel. The factory covers an area of nearly 8,000 square meters, with complete hardware facilities and nearly 1,000 square meters of dust-free workshops. The company has successively introduced a number of advanced automatic production equipment. In line with the product concept of "only for high-quality products", the company has passed the German TUV Rheinland ISO9001, ISO14000, Sedex, BSCI, intellectual property management system, etc., and has applied for 40 trademarks and more than 70 patents. The company has more than 800 long-term and in-depth cooperation customers at home and abroad, and its products are exported to more than 60 countries in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, North America, Europe, and South America. The concept of cooperation has won unanimous praise and recognition from domestic and foreign customers.

NAICS: 334
NAICS Definition: Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Employees: 43
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Apple

1 Apple Park Way, Cupertino, California, US, 95014
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 700 and 749

We’re a diverse collective of thinkers and doers, continually reimagining what’s possible to help us all do what we love in new ways. And the same innovation that goes into our products also applies to our practices — strengthening our commitment to leave the world better than we found it. This is where your work can make a difference in people’s lives. Including your own. Apple is an equal opportunity employer that is committed to inclusion and diversity. Visit apple.com/careers to learn more.

NAICS: 334
NAICS Definition: Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Employees: 161,773
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
11
Known data breaches
8
Attack type number
4

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ehang.jpeg
Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd.
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/apple.jpeg
Apple
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
Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Apple
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Computers and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. in 2025.

Incidents vs Computers and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Apple has 3828.57% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Apple cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ehang.jpeg
Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd.
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/apple.jpeg
Apple
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Physical Access to Device, Insider Threat (Former Employee), Social Engineering (Trust Exploitation)
Motivation: Financial Gain, Reputation/Influence (Leaking Exclusive Information)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Malicious image file, Memory manipulation
Motivation: Targeted attacks against high-value individuals, Potential mass exploitation post-patch
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Network
Motivation: Remote code execution, system compromise, memory corruption, unauthorized process termination, system crashes
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Apple company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Apple company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company has not reported any.

In the current year, Apple company has reported more cyber incidents than Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company.

Apple company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Apple company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Apple company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Apple company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. nor Apple holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company nor Apple company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Apple company employs more people globally than Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. company, reflecting its scale as a Computers and Electronics Manufacturing.

Neither Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. nor Apple holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. nor Apple holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. nor Apple holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. nor Apple holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. nor Apple holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Guangzhou Ehang Electronics Co., Ltd. nor Apple 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