Comparison Overview

GrayBar Ltd

VS

Rowe Hankins Ltd.

GrayBar Ltd

10 Fleming Close, Wellingborough, England, NN8 6UF, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

GrayBar is a UK based specialist manufacturer of products for the rail industry, with an impressive portfolio of products that have received PADs approval from Network Rail. We have collaborated very closely with Network Rail and leading Contractors to be the only UK supplier of Self Regulating Points Heating Systems, coupled with cutting edge Signalling Distribution Systems and the largest range of Rail Approved Cable Accessories in the industry for use on UK, Irish and European rail, Underground and Tramway infrastructures. GrayBar have successfully designed and manufactured many innovative products to support both Network Rail and TFL in their pursuit of working towards a safer and cost effective Rail Network. Twitter: https://twitter.com/graybaruk Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/graybaruk

NAICS: 3365
NAICS Definition: Railroad Rolling Stock Manufacturing
Employees: 16
Subsidiaries: 33
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Rowe Hankins Ltd.

Mason Street, Bury, Lancashire, BL9 0RH, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

Rowe Hankins Ltd. specialises in innovative trainborne and wayside products and systems for the world’s railways. Working closely with rolling stock manufacturers, fleet operators, track owners and infrastructure contractors our experienced engineers have a long and successful track record of providing the highest leevel of service to rail projects worldwide. In addition, we provide electro-mechanical and electronic products service facilities to maintain, overhaul and repair circuit breakers, contractors and on-train monitoring and recording (OTMR) systems.

NAICS: 336
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 33
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/graybaruk.jpeg
GrayBar Ltd
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/rowe-hankins.jpeg
Rowe Hankins Ltd.
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
GrayBar Ltd
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Rowe Hankins Ltd.
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Railroad Equipment Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for GrayBar Ltd in 2025.

Incidents vs Railroad Equipment Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Rowe Hankins Ltd. in 2025.

Incident History — GrayBar Ltd (X = Date, Y = Severity)

GrayBar Ltd cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Rowe Hankins Ltd. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rowe Hankins Ltd. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/graybaruk.jpeg
GrayBar Ltd
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rowe-hankins.jpeg
Rowe Hankins Ltd.
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both GrayBar Ltd company and Rowe Hankins Ltd. company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Rowe Hankins Ltd. company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to GrayBar Ltd company.

In the current year, Rowe Hankins Ltd. company and GrayBar Ltd company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Rowe Hankins Ltd. company nor GrayBar Ltd company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Rowe Hankins Ltd. company nor GrayBar Ltd company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Rowe Hankins Ltd. company nor GrayBar Ltd company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither GrayBar Ltd company nor Rowe Hankins Ltd. company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither GrayBar Ltd nor Rowe Hankins Ltd. holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

GrayBar Ltd company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Rowe Hankins Ltd. company.

Rowe Hankins Ltd. company employs more people globally than GrayBar Ltd company, reflecting its scale as a Railroad Equipment Manufacturing.

Neither GrayBar Ltd nor Rowe Hankins Ltd. holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither GrayBar Ltd nor Rowe Hankins Ltd. holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither GrayBar Ltd nor Rowe Hankins Ltd. holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither GrayBar Ltd nor Rowe Hankins Ltd. holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither GrayBar Ltd nor Rowe Hankins Ltd. holds HIPAA certification.

Neither GrayBar Ltd nor Rowe Hankins Ltd. 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