Comparison Overview

Hitachi Vantara

VS

CDW

Hitachi Vantara

2535 Augustine Dr, Santa Clara, California, US, 95054
Last Update: 2025-11-23

Hitachi Vantara is The Data Foundation for Innovation.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 10,372
Subsidiaries: 17
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

CDW

200 N. Milwaukee Ave., Vernon Hills, IL, 60061, US
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

At CDW, we know how to make technology work so people can do great things. Our experts bring a full-stack, full-lifestyle approach with custom solutions, services and relationships to bring your vision to life. Through decades of experience, scale, and deep industry expertise, we deliver the full promise of what technology can do to help you reach your goals and drive innovation. Partner with CDW, and together, let’s Make amazing happen. A Fortune 500 company and member of the S&P 500 Index, CDW helps its customers to navigate an increasingly complex IT market and maximize return on their technology investments. For more information about CDW, please visit www.CDW.com.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 17,869
Subsidiaries: 9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hitachi-vantara.jpeg
Hitachi Vantara
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/cdw.jpeg
CDW
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
Hitachi Vantara
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
CDW
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

Hitachi Vantara has 270.37% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CDW in 2025.

Incident History — Hitachi Vantara (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hitachi Vantara cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

CDW cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hitachi-vantara.jpeg
Hitachi Vantara
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Stolen credentials, Vulnerability exploitation, Phishing
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Radio Frequency (RF) communications
Motivation: Disruption of operations, brake system failures
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2025
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cdw.jpeg
CDW
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Hitachi Vantara company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas CDW company has not reported any.

In the current year, Hitachi Vantara company has reported more cyber incidents than CDW company.

Hitachi Vantara company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while CDW company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither CDW company nor Hitachi Vantara company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither CDW company nor Hitachi Vantara company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Hitachi Vantara company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while CDW company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Hitachi Vantara nor CDW holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Hitachi Vantara company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to CDW company.

CDW company employs more people globally than Hitachi Vantara company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither Hitachi Vantara nor CDW holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Hitachi Vantara nor CDW holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Hitachi Vantara nor CDW holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Hitachi Vantara nor CDW holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Hitachi Vantara nor CDW holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Hitachi Vantara nor CDW 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