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

Comparison Overview

Fitesa San José IturbideFitesa San José Iturbide
VS
Shaw IndustriesShaw Industries
Fitesa San José Iturbide

Fitesa San José Iturbide

N/A

Last Update: 07/05/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.fitesa.com
755/1000Fair

Fitesa is a leader in the nonwoven fabrics industry, specializing in providing innovative fabrics for the hygiene, medical, and industrial markets.

NAICS:313
NAICS Definition:Textile Mills
Employees:0
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Shaw Industries

Shaw Industries

616 East Walnut Ave, Dalton, 30720, US

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.shawinc.com
775/1000Fair

Shaw Industries Group, Inc. is a leader in flooring and other surface solutions designed for residential housing, commercial spaces and outdoor environments. Leveraging strengths in design, innovation and operational excellence, the company takes a people-centered, cust...

NAICS:313
NAICS Definition:Textile Mills
Employees:13,014
Subsidiaries:16
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Fitesa San José Iturbide

Fitesa San José Iturbide

-
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
Shaw Industries

Shaw Industries

-
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 Textile Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Fitesa San José Iturbide in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Textile Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Shaw Industries in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Fitesa San José Iturbide (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fitesa San José Iturbide cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Shaw Industries (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Shaw Industries cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Fitesa San José Iturbide

Fitesa San José Iturbide

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Shaw Industries

Shaw Industries

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-94426
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in xuxueli xxl-job up to 3.5.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /jobgroup/insert. This manipulation of the argument Name causes cross site scripting. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.5)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-94425
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Moore Threads MTT S80 Driver Package 340.150. The affected element is the function sub_140006F0C in the library mtdispkm64.sys of the component IOCTL Handler. The manipulation results in improper privilege management. Attacking locally is a requirement. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2
CVE-2026-94627
SUMMARY

vLLM Mooncake connector through 0.29.0 fails to properly manage GPU KV cache block ownership when concurrent child requests share a single transfer ID in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments. Attackers can trigger GPU memory exhaustion by submitting completion requests with multiple prompts, causing orphaned KV cache blocks to accumulate until process restart and eventually preventing legitimate requests from executing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-94626
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 fails to validate the tp_size parameter in kv_transfer_params on OpenAI-compatible completion endpoints, allowing attackers to allocate unbounded memory. Attackers can supply arbitrary tp_size values in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments to exhaust memory and trigger kernel OOM-kill of the decode worker process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-94625
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 contains a resource exhaustion vulnerability in MooncakeConnector where rejected prefill requests create ownerless transfer placeholders that are never reclaimed. Attackers can send rejected requests to exhaust sender task pools, causing valid requests to be delayed by up to 480 seconds while health checks continue returning success.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9