Comparison Overview
General Dynamics Mission Systems

General Dynamics Mission Systems
15036 Conference Center Dr, Chantilly, 20151, US
Last Update: 27/05/2026
At General Dynamics Mission Systems, a business unit of General Dynamics, we develop mission critical C4ISR solutions across the land, sea, air, space and cyber domains, but that doesn’t tell our whole story. When downed pilots are isolated in enemy territory, our equi...

Babcock International Group
33 Wigmore Street, London, W1U 1QX, GB
Last Update: 03/04/2026
Babcock is a FTSE 100 defence company operating in our focus countries of the UK, Australasia, Canada, France and South Africa, with exports to additional markets. Our Purpose, to create a safe and secure world, together, defines our strategy. We support and enhance o...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

General Dynamics Mission Systems







Babcock International Group






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for General Dynamics Mission Systems in 2026.
Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Babcock International Group in 2026.
Incident History - General Dynamics Mission Systems (X = Date, Y = Severity)
General Dynamics Mission Systems cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Babcock International Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Babcock International Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

General Dynamics Mission Systems

Babcock International Group
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.