Comparison Overview

Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland

VS

Stellantis

Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland

2550 Interstate Dr, None, Lakeland, Florida, US, 33805
Last Update: 2025-12-19

Lakeland Florida, Land Rover and Jaguar Sales and Service, Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland sells and services Jaguar and Land Rover vehicles in the greater Lakeland area.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 16
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Stellantis

Amsterdam, NL
Last Update: 2025-12-19
Between 600 and 649

Our storied and iconic brands embody the passion of their visionary founders and today’s customers in their innovative products and services: they include Abarth, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Citroën, Dodge, DS Automobiles, Fiat, Jeep®, Lancia, Maserati, Opel, Peugeot, Ram, Vauxhall and mobility brands Free2move and Leasys. Powered by our diversity, we lead the way the world moves – aspiring to become the greatest sustainable mobility tech company, not the biggest, while creating added value for all stakeholders as well as the communities in which we operate.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 96,409
Subsidiaries: 30
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jaguarlandroverlakeland.jpeg
Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland
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/stellantis.jpeg
Stellantis
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
Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Stellantis
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland has 47.06% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Stellantis has 341.18% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Stellantis cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jaguarlandroverlakeland.jpeg
Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Ransomware
Motivation: Data Theft, Financial Gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/stellantis.jpeg
Stellantis
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: OAuth Token Exploitation, Third-Party Integration (Salesloft's Drift AI chat tool), Salesforce Environment Pivoting
Motivation: Data Theft for Extortion, Phishing Campaign Enablement, Dark Web Data Monetization
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Compromised Third-Party Service Provider, Stolen OAuth Tokens, Salesforce Integration Exploitation
Motivation: Data Theft, Extortion, Phishing Enablement
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Breach
Motivation: Likely financial gain (data exploitation for scams/phishing)
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Stellantis company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Stellantis company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company.

In the current year, Stellantis company has reported more cyber incidents than Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company.

Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Stellantis company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Stellantis company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Stellantis company nor Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company nor Stellantis company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland nor Stellantis holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Stellantis company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company.

Stellantis company employs more people globally than Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland company, reflecting its scale as a Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.

Neither Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland nor Stellantis holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland nor Stellantis holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland nor Stellantis holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland nor Stellantis holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland nor Stellantis holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Jaguar Land Rover Lakeland nor Stellantis holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Versions starting with 0.211.0 and prior to 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0 contain a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in their workflow expression evaluation system. Under certain conditions, expressions supplied by authenticated users during workflow configuration may be evaluated in an execution context that is not sufficiently isolated from the underlying runtime. An authenticated attacker could abuse this behavior to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the n8n process. Successful exploitation may lead to full compromise of the affected instance, including unauthorized access to sensitive data, modification of workflows, and execution of system-level operations. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0. Users are strongly advised to upgrade to a patched version, which introduces additional safeguards to restrict expression evaluation. If upgrading is not immediately possible, administrators should consider the following temporary mitigations: Limit workflow creation and editing permissions to fully trusted users only; and/or deploy n8n in a hardened environment with restricted operating system privileges and network access to reduce the impact of potential exploitation. These workarounds do not fully eliminate the risk and should only be used as short-term measures.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

FastAPI Users allows users to quickly add a registration and authentication system to their FastAPI project. Prior to version 15.0.2, the OAuth login state tokens are completely stateless and carry no per-request entropy or any data that could link them to the session that initiated the OAuth flow. `generate_state_token()` is always called with an empty `state_data` dict, so the resulting JWT only contains the fixed audience claim plus an expiration timestamp. On callback, the library merely checks that the JWT verifies under `state_secret` and is unexpired; there is no attempt to match the state value to the browser that initiated the OAuth request, no correlation cookie, and no server-side cache. Any attacker can hit `/authorize`, capture the server-generated state, finish the upstream OAuth flow with their own provider account, and then trick a victim into loading `.../callback?code=<attacker_code>&state=<attacker_state>`. Because the state JWT is valid for any client for \~1 hour, the victim’s browser will complete the flow. This leads to login CSRF. Depending on the app’s logic, the login CSRF can lead to an account takeover of the victim account or to the victim user getting logged in to the attacker's account. Version 15.0.2 contains a patch for the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
Description

FileZilla Client 3.63.1 contains a DLL hijacking vulnerability that allows attackers to execute malicious code by placing a crafted TextShaping.dll in the application directory. Attackers can generate a reverse shell payload using msfvenom and replace the missing DLL to achieve remote code execution when the application launches.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/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
Description

LDAP Tool Box Self Service Password 1.5.2 contains a password reset vulnerability that allows attackers to manipulate HTTP Host headers during token generation. Attackers can craft malicious password reset requests that generate tokens sent to a controlled server, enabling potential account takeover by intercepting and using stolen reset tokens.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/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
Description

Kimai 1.30.10 contains a SameSite cookie vulnerability that allows attackers to steal user session cookies through malicious exploitation. Attackers can trick victims into executing a crafted PHP script that captures and writes session cookie information to a file, enabling potential session hijacking.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/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