Comparison Overview

ExxonMobil

VS

Weatherford

ExxonMobil

undefined, undefined, undefined, undefined, US
Last Update: 2025-12-02
Between 800 and 849

The need for energy is universal. That's why ExxonMobil scientists and engineers are pioneering new research and pursuing new technologies to reduce emissions while creating more efficient fuels. We're committed to responsibly meeting the world's energy needs. We aim to achieve #netzero emissions from our operated assets by 2050 (for Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions) and are taking a comprehensive approach to create emission-reduction roadmaps for major operated assets. Find us also on: YouTube.com/ExxonMobil Find our latest Privacy Policy at https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/Global-legal-pages/privacy-policy See our terms and conditions at https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/global-legal-pages/terms-and-conditions Find resources on our GHG emission reduction efforts here: https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/resources

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition: Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees: 61,842
Subsidiaries: 37
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Weatherford

undefined, Dublin, undefined, undefined, IE
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Weatherford International plc (Nasdaq: WFRD) is a leading global energy services company. Operating in approximately 75 countries, the Company answers the challenges of the energy industry with its global talent network of approximately 17,000 team members and approximately 350 operating locations, including manufacturing, research and development, service, and training facilities.

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition: Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees: 29,461
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/exxonmobil.jpeg
ExxonMobil
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/weatherford.jpeg
Weatherford
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
ExxonMobil
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Weatherford
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ExxonMobil in 2025.

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Weatherford in 2025.

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

ExxonMobil cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Weatherford cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/exxonmobil.jpeg
ExxonMobil
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Breach
Motivation: To protect corporate interests amid environmental scrutiny
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/weatherford.jpeg
Weatherford
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ExxonMobil company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Weatherford company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

ExxonMobil company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Weatherford company has not reported any.

In the current year, Weatherford company and ExxonMobil company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Weatherford company nor ExxonMobil company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

ExxonMobil company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Weatherford company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Weatherford company nor ExxonMobil company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither ExxonMobil company nor Weatherford company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Weatherford holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

ExxonMobil company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Weatherford company.

ExxonMobil company employs more people globally than Weatherford company, reflecting its scale as a Oil and Gas.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Weatherford holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Weatherford holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Weatherford holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Weatherford holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Weatherford holds HIPAA certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Weatherford holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

HedgeDoc is an open source, real-time, collaborative, markdown notes application. Prior to 1.10.4, some of HedgeDoc's OAuth2 endpoints for social login providers such as Google, GitHub, GitLab, Facebook or Dropbox lack CSRF protection, since they don't send a state parameter and verify the response using this parameter. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.10.4.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

Langflow versions up to and including 1.6.9 contain a chained vulnerability that enables account takeover and remote code execution. An overly permissive CORS configuration (allow_origins='*' with allow_credentials=True) combined with a refresh token cookie configured as SameSite=None allows a malicious webpage to perform cross-origin requests that include credentials and successfully call the refresh endpoint. An attacker-controlled origin can therefore obtain fresh access_token / refresh_token pairs for a victim session. Obtained tokens permit access to authenticated endpoints — including built-in code-execution functionality — allowing the attacker to execute arbitrary code and achieve full system compromise.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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

A vulnerability was detected in xerrors Yuxi-Know up to 0.4.0. This vulnerability affects the function OtherEmbedding.aencode of the file /src/models/embed.py. Performing manipulation of the argument health_url results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The patch is named 0ff771dc1933d5a6b78f804115e78a7d8625c3f3. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch. The vendor responded with a vulnerability confirmation and a list of security measures they have established already (e.g. disabled URL parsing, disabled URL upload mode, removed URL-to-markdown conversion).

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.8
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 4.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in Rarlab RAR App up to 7.11 Build 127 on Android. This affects an unknown part of the component com.rarlab.rar. Such manipulation leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. Attacks of this nature are highly complex. It is indicated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. Upgrading to version 7.20 build 128 is able to mitigate this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor responded very professional: "This is the real vulnerability affecting RAR for Android only. WinRAR and Unix RAR versions are not affected. We already fixed it in RAR for Android 7.20 build 128 and we publicly mentioned it in that version changelog. (...) To avoid confusion among users, it would be useful if such disclosure emphasizes that it is RAR for Android only issue and WinRAR isn't affected."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.1
Severity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 2.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
Description

A weakness has been identified in ZSPACE Q2C NAS up to 1.1.0210050. Affected by this issue is the function zfilev2_api.OpenSafe of the file /v2/file/safe/open of the component HTTP POST Request Handler. This manipulation of the argument safe_dir causes command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 9.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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