Comparison Overview
Extant Aerospace

Extant Aerospace
1615 W. NASA Blvd, Melbourne, 32901, US
Last Update: 14/05/2026
Extant Aerospace manufactures and supplies complex electronic assemblies to the DOD and international customers for military and commercial applications. The company offers digital communications solutions including a full line of Improved Data Modems (IDM) in various h...

NAVAL GROUP
40-42 rue du docteur FInlay, Paris cedex 15, 75732, FR
Last Update: 30/09/2026
As an international naval defence player, Naval Group is a partner for countries seeking to maintain control of their maritime sovereignty. Naval Group develops innovative solutions to meet its customers’ requirements. The group is present throughout the entire life cyc...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Extant Aerospace







NAVAL GROUP






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Extant Aerospace in 2026.
Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
NAVAL GROUP has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Extant Aerospace (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Extant Aerospace cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - NAVAL GROUP (X = Date, Y = Severity)
NAVAL GROUP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Extant Aerospace

NAVAL GROUP
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
HTTP/2 servers could end up crashing due to inadvertently modifying its HPACK encoder concurrently. This happens because the server modifies the HPACK encoder from two goroutines without synchronization: one uses the encoder to encode a HEADERS frame as part of a response sent to a client and the other modifies the encoder's table size when handling a SETTINGS frame containing SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE that a client sends. A malicious client can repeatedly send a request while changing the header table size to crash the server.
Multiple ECH outer extension references are not permitted under RFC 9849; previously, a client could send a well-crafted packet that could trigger memory exhaustion in the server process by specifying multiple references. We now reject these as malformed and curb the memory amplification vector as a result.
A trusted template author may have previously written a valid template wherein the use of the 'yield' keyword would not be correctly escaped. We now ensure that valid keyword uses are escaped and non-keyword uses are not escaped.
Improper certificate validation in Microsoft Partner Center allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.
Authorization bypass through user-controlled key in Microsoft Bookings allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.