Comparison Overview

Filcar spa

VS

Stertil Dock Products

Filcar spa

via Giacomo Balla 18, Reggio Emilia, 42124, IT
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Filcar S.p.A was founded and recognized internationally thanks to it’s brand. With it’s 2 production units, the companies supervised from Italy as well as abroad and it’s many distributors, Filcar is present in over 100 countries around the World. Apart from Italy, where the company has established strong grounds and an absolute prestigious position, Filcar achieves most of its turnover in the European and International market, positioning itself in a top position player in the sector within the Continent. The complete customer satisfaction and its requirements come in as the main mission of Filcar. This goal is reached through the accomplishment of precise strategic guide lines. : research and development, carful projecting, quality productivity and technical pre and after sales assistance.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 41
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Stertil Dock Products

Westkern 3, Kootstertille, 9288 CA, NL
Last Update: 2025-11-22

Stertil Dock Products is a global leader in loading bay equipment, prioritizing safety systems and boasting over half a century of expertise in the design, development, and manufacturing of dock levellers. As the go-to specialists in vehicle restraint systems and loading bay equipment, Stertil Dock Products is dedicated to ensuring safe, sustainable, and compliant distribution centers and warehousing facilities. Headquartered in the Netherlands, with an expansive production facility in Friesland, Dock Products operate as one of the three categories under the Stertil Group. With Sales and Service organizations strategically positioned in Germany, the UK, Turkey, France, and the Netherlands, and a widespread network of exclusive distributors worldwide, Stertil Dock Products is committed to delivering top-notch solutions for efficient and secure loading bay operations.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 146
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/filcar-spa.jpeg
Filcar spa
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/stertil-b-v-.jpeg
Stertil Dock Products
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
Filcar spa
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Stertil Dock Products
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Filcar spa in 2025.

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Stertil Dock Products in 2025.

Incident History — Filcar spa (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Filcar spa cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Stertil Dock Products (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Stertil Dock Products cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/filcar-spa.jpeg
Filcar spa
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/stertil-b-v-.jpeg
Stertil Dock Products
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Stertil Dock Products company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Filcar spa company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Stertil Dock Products company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Filcar spa company.

In the current year, Stertil Dock Products company and Filcar spa company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Stertil Dock Products company nor Filcar spa company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Stertil Dock Products company nor Filcar spa company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Stertil Dock Products company nor Filcar spa company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Filcar spa company nor Stertil Dock Products company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Filcar spa nor Stertil Dock Products holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Filcar spa company nor Stertil Dock Products company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Stertil Dock Products company employs more people globally than Filcar spa company, reflecting its scale as a Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering.

Neither Filcar spa nor Stertil Dock Products holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Filcar spa nor Stertil Dock Products holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Filcar spa nor Stertil Dock Products holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Filcar spa nor Stertil Dock Products holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Filcar spa nor Stertil Dock Products holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Filcar spa nor Stertil Dock Products holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H