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

Comparison Overview

FærgenFærgen
VS
UPSUPS
Færgen

Færgen

Dampskibskajen 3, Rønne, 3700, DK

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.faergen.dk
819/1000Good

Færgen sejler til og fra Als, Bornholm, Fanø, Langeland og Samsø. Med overfarterne Bøjden-Fynshav (AlsFærgen), Rønne-Ystad, Køge-Rønne og Sassnitz-Rønne (BornholmerFærgen), Esbjerg-Fanø (FanøFærgen), Spodsbjerg-Tårs (LangelandsFærgen), samt Hou-Sælvig og Kalundborg-Kolb...

NAICS:484
NAICS Definition:Truck Transportation
Employees:95
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
UPS

UPS

55 Glenlake Parkway, NE, Atlanta, GA, US, 30328

Last Update: 28/05/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://about.ups.com/
809/1000Good

Operating in more than 200 countries and territories, we’re committed to moving our world forward by delivering what matters. Beginning as a small messenger service, UPS was started by two enterprising teenagers and a $100 loan. Now, we’re almost 500,000 UPSers strong, ...

NAICS:484
NAICS Definition:Truck Transportation
Employees:172,902
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Færgen

Færgen

-
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
UPS

UPS

-
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 Truck Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Færgen in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Truck Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UPS in 2026.

Incidents

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

Færgen cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

UPS 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...
Færgen

Færgen

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
F-R410092125
UPS

UPS

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
UPS134025623

FAQ

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