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

Comparison Overview

Hammer EnterpriseHammer Enterprise
VS
ASUSASUS
Hammer Enterprise

Hammer Enterprise

Hammer Distribution, Ashwood, Chineham Business Park, Basingstoke, GB, RG24 8EH

Last Update: 21/04/2026

View Profile
756/1000Fair

Hammer Enterprise is where depth meets delivery. We provide specialist distribution and consultancy across servers, storage, networking, infrastructure, and components — the backbone of enterprise IT. Our approach goes beyond supply. With dedicated technical teams, stro...

NAICS:3341
NAICS Definition:Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
ASUS

ASUS

No.15, Lide Road, Taipei City, 112, TW

Last Update: 23/05/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
http://www.asus.com
541/1000Critical

ASUS is a global technology leader delivering incredible experiences that enhance the lives of people everywhere. World renowned for continuously reimagining today’s technologies for tomorrow, ASUS puts users first In Search of Incredible to provide the world’s most inn...

NAICS:3341
NAICS Definition:Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Employees:16,975
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
4
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
4

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Hammer Enterprise

Hammer Enterprise

-
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
ASUS

ASUS

-
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 Computer Hardware Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hammer Enterprise in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Computer Hardware Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

ASUS has 277.36% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Hammer Enterprise (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hammer Enterprise 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 - ASUS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ASUS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Hammer Enterprise

Hammer Enterprise

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
ASUS

ASUS

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ASU1779539103
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
DIETOYFILASUCITBENMAGLINYAMFIATHEBAN1774023969
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ASU1770130670

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-56078
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains a path traversal vulnerability in MultiAgentMonitor that fails to sanitize agent IDs when building file paths. Attackers can include traversal sequences like ../ in agent IDs to read, write, or overwrite arbitrary files, enabling sensitive disclosure, denial of service, or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56077
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MultiAgentLedger component that allows attackers to access sensitive data by registering agents with duplicate IDs. Attackers can exploit the lack of agent ID uniqueness enforcement to share ledger instances and expose system prompts and conversation history between agents.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56076
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.128 contains a cross-origin agent execution vulnerability in the AGUI endpoint that allows remote attackers to trigger arbitrary agent execution. The POST /agui endpoint lacks authentication and hardcodes Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * headers, combined with Starlette's Content-Type-agnostic JSON parsing, enabling attackers to bypass CORS preflight checks via simple requests and exfiltrate sensitive agent responses including tool execution results and environment data.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56075
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 4.5.128 contains an arbitrary shell command execution vulnerability where the UI modules hardcode approval_mode to auto, overriding administrator configuration from PRAISON_APPROVAL_MODE environment variable. Authenticated attackers can instruct the LLM agent to execute arbitrary shell commands via subprocess.run with shell=True, bypassing the manual approval gate and insufficient command sanitization blocklists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56074
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8