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

Comparison Overview

FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SLFITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL
VS
Yara InternationalYara International
FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL

FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL

POLIGONO INDUSTRIAL OESTE, c/Alcalde Clemente García, Parc.24/37.Mód.D-1, MURCIA, 30169, ES

Last Update: 04/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://fitosoil.com/
754/1000Fair

We are a team of professionals and specialists with a very clear objective: to deliver new analytical techniques for detection and quantification of chemical and biological agents.

NAICS:111
NAICS Definition:Crop Production
Employees:80
Subsidiaries:13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Yara International

Yara International

Drammensveien 131, Oslo, NO, N-0277

Last Update: 28/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.yara.com
790/1000Fair

Yara's mission is to responsibly feed the world and protect the planet. We pursue a strategy of sustainable value growth through reducing emissions from crop nutrition production and developing low-emission energy solutions. Yara’s ambition is focused on growing a natur...

NAICS:111
NAICS Definition:Crop Production
Employees:14,843
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL

FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL

-
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
Yara International

Yara International

-
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 Farming Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Farming Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Yara International in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL (X = Date, Y = Severity)

FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL 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 - Yara International (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Yara International 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...
FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL

FITOSOIL LABORATORIOS SL

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Yara International

Yara International

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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