Comparison Overview

Ferrari

VS

General Motors

Ferrari

Abetone inferiore, Maranello, MO, IT, 41053
Last Update: 2025-12-11
View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.ferrari.com

Ferrari's story officially began in 1947 when its first road car, the 125 S, emerged from the gate of no. 4 Via Abetone Inferiore in Maranello. The iconic two-seater went on to win the Rome Grand Prix later that year and shortly thereafter was developed into a refined GT roadster. The company has travelled a long way since then, but its mission has remained unaltered: to make unique sports cars that represent the finest in Italian design and craftsmanship, both on the track and on the road. The very definition of excellence and sportiness, Ferrari needs no introduction. Its principal calling card is the numerous Formula One titles it has won: a total of 16 constructors’ championships and 15 drivers’ championships. And of course, there is the impressive lineup of legendary GT models. Cars that are unique for their design, technology and luxurious styling and that represent the best in Italian the world over.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 9,613
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3
View Profile

General Motors

100 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan, US, 48243
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 750 and 799
http://www.gm.com

General Motors’ vision is to create a world with Zero Crashes, Zero Emissions and Zero Congestion, and we have committed ourselves to leading the way toward this future. Today, we are in the midst of a transportation revolution, and we have the ambition, the talent and the technology to realize the safer, better and more sustainable world we want. As an open, inclusive company, we’re also creating an environment where everyone feels welcomed and valued for who they are. One team, where all ideas are considered and heard, where everyone can contribute to their fullest potential, with a culture based in respect, integrity, accountability and equality. Our team brings wide-ranging perspectives and experiences to solving the complex transportation challenges of today and tomorrow. For information on the GM Privacy Statement, please visit http://www.gm.com/privacy-statement.html

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 103,855
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ferrari.jpeg
Ferrari
—
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/general-motors.jpeg
General Motors
—
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
Ferrari
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
General Motors
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ferrari in 2025.

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

General Motors has 66.67% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Ferrari cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — General Motors (X = Date, Y = Severity)

General Motors cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ferrari.jpeg
Ferrari
Incidents

Date Detected: 03/2023
Type:Breach
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2022
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Data theft and ransom
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 05/2022
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Subdomain Hacking
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/general-motors.jpeg
General Motors
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Compromised Credentials
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2022
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Exploitation of on-board ports
Motivation: High horsepower and resale value
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Ferrari and General Motors have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, General Motors company has reported more cyber incidents than Ferrari company.

Ferrari company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while General Motors company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both General Motors company and Ferrari company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Both General Motors company and Ferrari company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

General Motors company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Ferrari company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Ferrari nor General Motors holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Ferrari company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to General Motors company.

General Motors company employs more people globally than Ferrari company, reflecting its scale as a Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.

Neither Ferrari nor General Motors holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ferrari nor General Motors holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ferrari nor General Motors holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ferrari nor General Motors holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ferrari nor General Motors holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ferrari nor General Motors holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
References
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References