Comparison Overview

Ericsson

VS

Vivo (Telefônica Brasil)

Ericsson

Torshamnsgatan 21, Kista, Stockholm, SE
Last Update: 2025-12-09
View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.ericsson.com

The future of mobile isn’t on the horizon, it’s happening now. At Ericsson, we’re building the foundation for an open network ecosystem where industries, developers, and enterprises thrive. The convergence of 5G, AI, cloud, and network APIs isn’t just a technological shift; it’s a transformation that is redefining industries and enhancing everyday life. Open, programmable networks are enabling real-time innovation and unlocking new business models across the globe. Imagine a world where developers can dynamically access network capabilities on demand, where enterprises don’t just use connectivity but shape it. This isn’t a distant vision, it’s the ecosystem we’re creating today. Collaboration fuels everything we do. By working across industries, we’re designing a future where connectivity isn’t just seamless. It’s intelligent, programmable, and transformative. The shift is happening. Are you part of it?

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 97,356
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
View Profile

Vivo (Telefônica Brasil)

Avenida Eng. Luís Carlos Berrini, 1376, São Paulo, SP, BR, 04571 - 000
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799
http://www.vivo.com.br

Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) is part of the Telefónica Group and with more than 94 million customers, of which 75 million mobile and 19 million fixed, we are the largest telecommunications company in Brazil, with nationwide presence and a complete, convergent portfolio of products, combining fixed, mobile and digital services. Our purpose is “Digitalize to Bring Closer”, helping to build a digital nation and transforming the life of our customers. More and more, we connect people and things with Fiber, 4G and 4.5G and cover more cities with the network quality that only Vivo has. Today, we cover around 90% of the population with 4G and are accelerating the launch of cities with 4.5G, using carrier aggregation technology. In the fixed operation, we ended 2019 with 21 million homes-passed (HPs) with fiber optic technology, of which 11 million HPs with FTTH (fiber to the home). In addition, all cities with FTTH technology also offer TV over fiber (IPTV), aiming to offer the best speed and experience to our consumers. At Vivo, we also do more than just telecommunications. Within the Group, we have the Telefônica Vivo Foundation, that is committed to making education a priority, developing projects that are based on human potential and use technology as an instrument in favor of inclusion and digital culture.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 37,866
Subsidiaries: 20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ericsson.jpeg
Ericsson
—
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/vivo-telefonicabr.jpeg
Vivo (Telefônica Brasil)
—
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
Ericsson
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Vivo (Telefônica Brasil)
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ericsson in 2025.

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) in 2025.

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

Ericsson cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ericsson.jpeg
Ericsson
Incidents

Date Detected: 03/2022
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Exposure of Resource to Wrong Sphere
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/vivo-telefonicabr.jpeg
Vivo (Telefônica Brasil)
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Internal Jira development and ticketing server
Motivation: Ransom
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Ericsson company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Ericsson and Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) company has reported more cyber incidents than Ericsson company.

Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Ericsson company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) company nor Ericsson company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) company nor Ericsson company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Ericsson company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Ericsson nor Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Ericsson company.

Ericsson company employs more people globally than Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) company, reflecting its scale as a Telecommunications.

Neither Ericsson nor Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ericsson nor Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ericsson nor Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ericsson nor Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ericsson nor Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ericsson nor Vivo (Telefônica Brasil) 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