Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

Essilor Pro-EyecareEssilor Pro-Eyecare
VS
STERISSTERIS
Essilor Pro-Eyecare

Essilor Pro-Eyecare

81, Boulevard Jean-Baptiste Oudry, Créteil, 94000, FR

Last Update: 25/01/2026

View Profile
760/1000Fair

ESSILOR EUROPE PRO-EYECARE: PROTECT AND IMPROVE THE VISION OF EACH OF YOUR EMPLOYEES A good vision health is of first importance, it affects the safety and the efficiency of each person in its work. Essilor Pro-Eyecare ambition is to foster adapted solutions for all ty...

NAICS:3391
NAICS Definition:Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
STERIS

STERIS

5960 Heisley Rd, Mentor, 44060, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.steris.com
781/1000Fair

STERIS is a leading provider of infection prevention and other procedural products and services, focused primarily on healthcare, pharmaceutical and medical device Customers. MISSION WE HELP OUR CUSTOMERS CREATE A HEALTHIER AND SAFER WORLD by providing innovative healt...

NAICS:3391
NAICS Definition:Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Employees:10,716
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Essilor Pro-Eyecare

Essilor Pro-Eyecare

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
STERIS

STERIS

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Medical Equipment Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Essilor Pro-Eyecare in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Medical Equipment Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for STERIS in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Essilor Pro-Eyecare (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Essilor Pro-Eyecare cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - STERIS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

STERIS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Essilor Pro-Eyecare

Essilor Pro-Eyecare

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
STERIS

STERIS

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare company and STERIS company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare and STERIS, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare and STERIS, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Essilor Pro-Eyecare or STERIS ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Essilor Pro-Eyecare or STERIS ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare and STERIS, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Essilor Pro-Eyecare and STERIS, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2