Comparison Overview

Elk River, Inc

VS

BESIX

Elk River, Inc

1202 26th Street SW, Cullman, AL, 35056, US
Last Update: 2025-03-09 (UTC)
Between 900 and 1000

Excellent

Elk River Inc. manufactures performance-designed fall protection products for the professionally trained worker.

NAICS: 23
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 53
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

BESIX

Gemeenschappenlaan 100 Sint-Lambrechts-Woluwe, Brussel 1200, BE
Last Update: 2025-05-06 (UTC)

Excellent

Between 900 and 1000

A multidisciplinary group with over 110 yearsโ€šร„รด experience. Since first going into action in 1909, the BESIX Group has over the years grown into a multidisciplinary company with a leading position in its markets: construction, property development and concessions. This wide-range expertise enables us to handle every aspect of a project, from financing over designing and building to operating and maintaining. BESIX Contracting specializes in construction, infrastructure and marine works, often in contracts with a high level of complexity. In Benelux and France, the Groupโ€šร„รดs regional affiliates BESIX Infra, Vanhout, Wust, Cobelba, Jacques Delens and Lux TP ensure a strong presence and a local approach. With Franki Foundations, Socogetra, Sanotec and Van den Berg, the Group offers specialist niche solutions for the building market like deep foundations, geo-engineering, road construction, water treatment and cable and pipeline construction. Backed by its experience in its home markets, BESIX has built up strong positions outside Europe. A typical example is the Middle East, where over a 55 year period BESIX has built up an impressive portfolio. In 2018, BESIX strengthened its position in Australia by acquiring, through a public takeover bid, all the shares of construction company Watpac Ltd. In 2018 the Group achieved sales revenues of over EUR 2.5 billion. The Group employs more than 15,000 persons in 26 countries across 5 continents.

NAICS: 23
NAICS Definition: Construction
Employees: 10,001+
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/elk-river-inc-.jpeg
Elk River, Inc
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/besix.jpeg
BESIX
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
Elk River, Inc
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
BESIX
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Construction Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Elk River, Inc in 2025.

Incidents vs Construction Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BESIX in 2025.

Incident History โ€” Elk River, Inc (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Elk River, Inc cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” BESIX (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BESIX cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/elk-river-inc-.jpeg
Elk River, Inc
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/besix.jpeg
BESIX
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Elk River, Inc company and BESIX company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, BESIX company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Elk River, Inc company.

In the current year, BESIX company and Elk River, Inc company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither BESIX company nor Elk River, Inc company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither BESIX company nor Elk River, Inc company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither BESIX company nor Elk River, Inc company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Elk River, Inc company nor BESIX company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Elk River, Inc company nor BESIX company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Elk River, Inc company employs more people globally than BESIX company, reflecting its scale as a Construction.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Better Auth is an authentication and authorization library for TypeScript. In versions prior to 1.3.26, unauthenticated attackers can create or modify API keys for any user by passing that user's id in the request body to the `api/auth/api-key/create` route. `session?.user ?? (authRequired ? null : { id: ctx.body.userId })`. When no session exists but `userId` is present in the request body, `authRequired` becomes false and the user object is set to the attacker-controlled ID. Server-only field validation only executes when `authRequired` is true (lines 280-295), allowing attackers to set privileged fields. No additional authentication occurs before the database operation, so the malicious payload is accepted. The same pattern exists in the update endpoint. This is a critical authentication bypass enabling full an unauthenticated attacker can generate an API key for any user and immediately gain complete authenticated access. This allows the attacker to perform any action as the victim user using the api key, potentially compromise the user data and the application depending on the victim's privileges. Version 1.3.26 contains a patch for the issue.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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

Allstar is a GitHub App to set and enforce security policies. In versions prior to 4.5, a vulnerability in Allstarโ€™s Reviewbot component caused inbound webhook requests to be validated against a hard-coded, shared secret. The value used for the secret token was compiled into the Allstar binary and could not be configured at runtime. In practice, this meant that every deployment using Reviewbot would validate requests with the same secret unless the operator modified source code and rebuilt the component - an expectation that is not documented and is easy to miss. All Allstar releases prior to v4.5 that include the Reviewbot code path are affected. Deployments on v4.5 and later are not affected. Those who have not enabled or exposed the Reviewbot endpoint are not exposed to this issue.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 4.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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

Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities with Calendar events in Liferay Portal 7.4.3.35 through 7.4.3.111, and Liferay DXP 2023.Q4.0 through 2023.Q4.5, 2023.Q3.1 through 2023.Q3.7, 7.4 update 35 through update 92, and 7.3 update 25 through update 36 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted payload injected into a userโ€™s (1) First Name, (2) Middle Name or (3) Last Name text field.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 4.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:L/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

Python Social Auth is a social authentication/registration mechanism. In versions prior to 5.6.0, upon authentication, the user could be associated by e-mail even if the `associate_by_email` pipeline was not included. This could lead to account compromise when a third-party authentication service does not validate provided e-mail addresses or doesn't require unique e-mail addresses. Version 5.6.0 contains a patch. As a workaround, review the authentication service policy on e-mail addresses; many will not allow exploiting this vulnerability.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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

Confidential Containers's Trustee project contains tools and components for attesting confidential guests and providing secrets to them. In versions prior to 0.15.0, the attestation-policy endpoint didn't check if the kbs-client submitting the request was actually authenticated (had the right key). This allowed any kbs-client to actually change the attestation policy. Version 0.15.0 fixes the issue.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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