Comparison Overview

Joe Pizik Electric

VS

Astaldi

Joe Pizik Electric

375 Oliver Dr, Troy, Michigan 48084-5433, US
Last Update: 2025-03-06 (UTC)

Excellent

None

NAICS: 23
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 8
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Astaldi

Via G.V. Bona, 65 Rome, 00156, IT
Last Update: 2025-05-06 (UTC)

Excellent

Between 900 and 1000

ASTALDI is an international construction group with a strong presence and a leading position in Italy; it constructs large and technologically complex infrastructures, acting primarily as EPC Contractor, but also as a concession operator. It is engaged in infrastructures in Transport Infrastructure, Water and Energy, Industrial and Civil buildings, Plants design, Operation & Maintenance. Thanks to its strong technical experience, Astaldi is ranked: โ€“ 3rd contractor worldwide in bridges โ€“ 5th in hydro plants โ€“ 14th in mass transit and rail โ€“ 19th in highways & healthcare buildings โ€“ 21st in airports. Listed on the Milan Stock Exchange since 2002, it operates with over 11,500 employees; generates more than 3 billion euros in revenues and has an orders backlog of over 27 billion euros.

NAICS: 23
NAICS Definition: Construction
Employees: 10,001+
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/defaultcompany.jpeg
Joe Pizik Electric
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/astaldi.jpeg
Astaldi
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
Joe Pizik Electric
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Astaldi
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Construction Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Joe Pizik Electric in 2025.

Incidents vs Construction Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Astaldi in 2025.

Incident History โ€” Joe Pizik Electric (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Joe Pizik Electric cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Astaldi (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Astaldi cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Joe Pizik Electric
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/astaldi.jpeg
Astaldi
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Joe Pizik Electric company and Astaldi company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Astaldi company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Joe Pizik Electric company.

In the current year, Astaldi company and Joe Pizik Electric company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Astaldi company nor Joe Pizik Electric company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Astaldi company nor Joe Pizik Electric company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Astaldi company nor Joe Pizik Electric company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Joe Pizik Electric company nor Astaldi company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Joe Pizik Electric company nor Astaldi company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Joe Pizik Electric company employs more people globally than Astaldi company, reflecting its scale as a Construction.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

MinIO is a high-performance object storage system. In all versions prior to RELEASE.2025-10-15T17-29-55Z, a privilege escalation vulnerability allows service accounts and STS (Security Token Service) accounts with restricted session policies to bypass their inline policy restrictions when performing operations on their own account, specifically when creating new service accounts for the same user. The vulnerability exists in the IAM policy validation logic where the code incorrectly relied on the DenyOnly argument when validating session policies for restricted accounts. When a session policy is present, the system should validate that the action is allowed by the session policy, not just that it is not denied. An attacker with valid credentials for a restricted service or STS account can create a new service account for itself without policy restrictions, resulting in a new service account with full parent privileges instead of being restricted by the inline policy. This allows the attacker to access buckets and objects beyond their intended restrictions and modify, delete, or create objects outside their authorized scope. The vulnerability is fixed in version RELEASE.2025-10-15T17-29-55Z.

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

Envoy is an open source edge and service proxy. Envoy versions earlier than 1.36.2, 1.35.6, 1.34.10, and 1.33.12 contain a use-after-free vulnerability in the Lua filter. When a Lua script executing in the response phase rewrites a response body so that its size exceeds the configured per_connection_buffer_limit_bytes (default 1MB), Envoy generates a local reply whose headers override the original response headers, leaving dangling references and causing a crash. This results in denial of service. Updating to versions 1.36.2, 1.35.6, 1.34.10, or 1.33.12 fixes the issue. Increasing per_connection_buffer_limit_bytes (and for HTTP/2 the initial_stream_window_size) or increasing per_request_buffer_limit_bytes / request_body_buffer_limit can reduce the likelihood of triggering the condition but does not correct the underlying memory safety flaw.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

In Xpdf 4.05 (and earlier), a PDF object loop in a CMap, via the "UseCMap" entry, leads to infinite recursion and a stack overflow.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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

A vulnerability was identified in NucleoidAI Nucleoid up to 0.7.10. The impacted element is the function extension.apply of the file /src/cluster.ts of the component Outbound Request Handler. Such manipulation of the argument https/ip/port/path/headers leads to server-side request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
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
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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

HCL Traveler for Microsoft Outlook (HTMO) is susceptible to a credential leakage which could allow an attacker to access other computers or applications.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N