Comparison Overview

GSK

VS

UCB

GSK

79 New Oxford Street, None, London, England, GB, WC1A 1DG
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 800 and 849

We are uniting science, technology and talent to get ahead of disease together. Our community guidelines: https://gsk.to/socialmedia

NAICS: 3254
NAICS Definition: Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing
Employees: 90,031
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

UCB

Allée de la Recherche, 60, Brussels, BE
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 800 and 849

At UCB, we believe everyone deserves to live the best life they can - as free as possible from the challenges and uncertainty of disease. Our purpose is to support people living with severe central nervous system and immunological conditions by delivering meaningful solutions that go beyond medicine. We are driven by the experiences of patients and caregivers, and inspired to pursue innovations that create real value - not just in clinical outcomes, but in everyday moments, dreams pursued, and simple pleasures enjoyed. Our ambition is to unlock transformative science and technologies that respond to unmet needs and elevate lives. From our headquarters in Belgium to nearly 40 countries around the world, we nurture a culture of respect and care. We act with thoughtful intent to ensure our work reflects the voices of those we serve. By listening deeply and collaborating across borders and disciplines, we enable cutting-edge research shaped by patients’ needs. Through strong connections with healthcare professionals, partners, and communities, we strive to make a lasting impact - today and into the future.

NAICS: 3254
NAICS Definition: Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing
Employees: 12,309
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/gsk.jpeg
GSK
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/ucb-pharma.jpeg
UCB
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
GSK
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
UCB
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for GSK in 2025.

Incidents vs Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UCB in 2025.

Incident History — GSK (X = Date, Y = Severity)

GSK cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — UCB (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UCB cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gsk.jpeg
GSK
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ucb-pharma.jpeg
UCB
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

GSK company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to UCB company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, UCB company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to GSK company.

In the current year, UCB company and GSK company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither UCB company nor GSK company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither UCB company nor GSK company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither UCB company nor GSK company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither GSK company nor UCB company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither GSK nor UCB holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

GSK company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to UCB company.

GSK company employs more people globally than UCB company, reflecting its scale as a Pharmaceutical Manufacturing.

Neither GSK nor UCB holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither GSK nor UCB holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither GSK nor UCB holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither GSK nor UCB holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither GSK nor UCB holds HIPAA certification.

Neither GSK nor UCB holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N