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

Comparison Overview

Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA)Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA)
VS
Lockheed MartinLockheed Martin
Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA)

Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA)

13873 Park Center Rd, Herndon, 20171, US

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.ewa.com
705/1000Moderate

EWA is a veteran-owned, small broad-based technology business providing professional services and specialized products to its customers. EWA prides itself on overcoming technological challenges and delivering on-time products for its customers. For over 40 years, EWA ha...

NAICS:336414
NAICS Definition:Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees:289
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2
Lockheed Martin

Lockheed Martin

6801 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, 20817, US

Last Update: 20/05/2026

View Profile
755/1000Fair

The world relies on what we do. Headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, with offices across the U.S. and around the globe, our team delivers solutions that strengthen national security, shape industries and push engineering and technology to new levels. We collaborate t...

NAICS:336414
NAICS Definition:Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees:104,489
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA)

Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA)

-
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
Lockheed Martin

Lockheed Martin

-
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 Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

Lockheed Martin has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Lockheed Martin (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lockheed Martin cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA)

Electronic Warfare Associates (EWA)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ELE1113101122
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
ELE23264322
Lockheed Martin

Lockheed Martin

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
LOC1774283448
🔒 Incident : Breach
LOCULANOR1777876145
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
LOC621092125

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67595
SUMMARY

VaahCMS versions 2.0.0 through 2.3.4 contain a malicious obfuscated JavaScript payload embedded in the Blade template responsible for rendering security OTP emails, allowing remote attackers to execute unauthorized code in any browser that renders the affected email template with JavaScript enabled. The payload establishes a WebSocket connection to a hardcoded command-and-control endpoint, installs a password-field keylogger using MutationObserver to capture dynamically added inputs, scrapes WhatsApp Web DOM content, and accepts remote commands to redirect or overwrite the rendered page.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-15157
SUMMARY

undici does not validate the type property of a duck-typed blob-like request body before using it as the Content-Type header on the HTTP/1.1 dispatcher. In undici before 6.28.0, from 7.0.0 up to before 7.29.0, and from 8.0.0 up to before 8.9.0, an application that passes a hand-rolled blob-like body (via request, stream, pipeline, or dispatch) whose type is derived from untrusted input allows an attacker to inject CRLF sequences and append arbitrary HTTP headers, potentially smuggling a second request past the upstream. Native Blob objects are safe because their constructor strips CRLF from the type, and fetch is unaffected because it validates headers, but ecosystem libraries that build duck-typed blob shapes from user input can reach the vulnerable path. This is the same defect class as CVE-2022-35948 and CVE-2026-1527, on a header sink that the earlier fixes did not cover. The issue is fixed in undici 6.28.0, 7.29.0, and 8.9.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-14643
SUMMARY

undici's cache interceptor mishandles optional whitespace placed around the equals sign of a qualified no-cache or private Cache-Control directive. In undici from 7.0.0 up to before 7.29.0 and from 8.0.0 up to before 8.9.0, the parser either drops the directive or stores a field name with literal quote characters, so the cache decision fails to recognize the qualification and the response is stored. In shared-cache mode, this lets a response containing one user's authenticated data be served from cache to a later caller, including an unauthenticated one, when both requests resolve to the same cache key. It affects applications that enable the cache interceptor in shared mode, forward Authorization headers upstream, and receive cacheable responses with qualified directives padded with whitespace around the equals sign. This is the whitespace-around-equals variant that the fix for CVE-2026-9678 did not normalize, and it is fixed in undici 7.29.0 and 8.9.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2025-69945
SUMMARY

kishan0725 Hospital Management System 4.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in /doctor/edit-patient.php?editid=1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA