Comparison Overview

HPE

VS

Transocean

HPE

None
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

HPE is a propane company that is progressive and innovative in nature looking to make an impact in western Kansas. Many people have relied on HPE for their home, business, and agricultural propane needs. Throughout our history, we have taken pride in not only being leaders in the propane industry, but for exceeding our customers’ expectations in service, safety and value. While many of our clients may only know us as a propane company, we’ve spent many years growing our services to include fueling stations and filter cleaning. Our commitment to providing excellent customer service remains the same. For the residential customer, a referral program is offered which includes existing customers receiving an incentive for referring family, friends, or coworkers to HPE or Filter Express. Corporate pricing is available for commercial customers which offers cost savings reducing operating budgets for customers. Our service area includes within 100 mile radius of Garden City, Kansas.

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition: Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees: 173
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Transocean

Turmstrasse 30, Zug, CH, 0000
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Transocean is a leading international provider of offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas wells. The company specializes in technically demanding sectors of the global offshore drilling business, with a particular focus on ultra-deepwater and harsh environment drilling services and operates the highest specification floating offshore drilling fleet in the world. Transocean owns or has partial ownership interests in and operates a fleet of 27 mobile offshore drilling units, consisting of 20 ultra-deepwater floaters and seven harsh environment floaters.

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition: Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees: 10,007
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/hpe.jpeg
HPE
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/transocean.jpeg
Transocean
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
HPE
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Transocean
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

HPE has 13.64% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Transocean in 2025.

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

HPE cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Transocean cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hpe.jpeg
HPE
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Network-based, Unauthenticated Access, Remote Exploitation
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2024
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Unauthenticated Command Execution
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/transocean.jpeg
Transocean
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

HPE company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Transocean company has not reported any.

In the current year, HPE company has reported more cyber incidents than Transocean company.

Neither Transocean company nor HPE company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Transocean company nor HPE company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Transocean company nor HPE company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

HPE company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Transocean company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither HPE nor Transocean holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither HPE company nor Transocean company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Transocean company employs more people globally than HPE company, reflecting its scale as a Oil and Gas.

Neither HPE nor Transocean holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither HPE nor Transocean holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither HPE nor Transocean holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither HPE nor Transocean holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither HPE nor Transocean holds HIPAA certification.

Neither HPE nor Transocean holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Zerobyte is a backup automation tool Zerobyte versions prior to 0.18.5 and 0.19.0 contain an authentication bypass vulnerability where authentication middleware is not properly applied to API endpoints. This results in certain API endpoints being accessible without valid session credentials. This is dangerous for those who have exposed Zerobyte to be used outside of their internal network. A fix has been applied in both version 0.19.0 and 0.18.5. If immediate upgrade is not possible, restrict network access to the Zerobyte instance to trusted networks only using firewall rules or network segmentation. This is only a temporary mitigation; upgrading is strongly recommended.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Open Source Point of Sale (opensourcepos) is a web based point of sale application written in PHP using CodeIgniter framework. Starting in version 3.4.0 and prior to version 3.4.2, a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the application's filter configuration. The CSRF protection mechanism was **explicitly disabled**, allowing the application to process state-changing requests (POST) without verifying a valid CSRF token. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this by hosting a malicious web page. If a logged-in administrator visits this page, their browser is forced to send unauthorized requests to the application. A successful exploit allows the attacker to silently create a new Administrator account with full privileges, leading to a complete takeover of the system and loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The vulnerability has been patched in version 3.4.2. The fix re-enables the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` and resolves associated AJAX race conditions by adjusting token regeneration settings. As a workaround, administrators can manually re-enable the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` by uncommenting the protection line. However, this is not recommended without applying the full patch, as it may cause functionality breakage in the Sales module due to token synchronization issues.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Model Context Protocol (MCP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious MCP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered automatically without any user interaction besides opening the project in the IDE. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Language Server Protocol (LSP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious LSP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered when a user opens project file for which there is an LSP entry. A concerted effort by an attacker to seed a project settings file (`./zed/settings.json`) with malicious language server configurations could result in arbitrary code execution with the user's privileges if the user opens the project in Zed without reviewing the contents. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Storybook is a frontend workshop for building user interface components and pages in isolation. A vulnerability present starting in versions 7.0.0 and prior to versions 7.6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, and 10.1.10 relates to Storybook’s handling of environment variables defined in a `.env` file, which could, in specific circumstances, lead to those variables being unexpectedly bundled into the artifacts created by the `storybook build` command. When a built Storybook is published to the web, the bundle’s source is viewable, thus potentially exposing those variables to anyone with access. For a project to potentially be vulnerable to this issue, it must build the Storybook (i.e. run `storybook build` directly or indirectly) in a directory that contains a `.env` file (including variants like `.env.local`) and publish the built Storybook to the web. Storybooks built without a `.env` file at build time are not affected, including common CI-based builds where secrets are provided via platform environment variables rather than `.env` files. Storybook runtime environments (i.e. `storybook dev`) are not affected. Deployed applications that share a repo with your Storybook are not affected. Users should upgrade their Storybook—on both their local machines and CI environment—to version .6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, or 10.1.10 as soon as possible. Maintainers additionally recommend that users audit for any sensitive secrets provided via `.env` files and rotate those keys. Some projects may have been relying on the undocumented behavior at the heart of this issue and will need to change how they reference environment variables after this update. If a project can no longer read necessary environmental variable values, either prefix the variables with `STORYBOOK_` or use the `env` property in Storybook’s configuration to manually specify values. In either case, do not include sensitive secrets as they will be included in the built bundle.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L