Comparison Overview
Johnson Controls Fire Detection

Johnson Controls Fire Detection
Johnson Controls Headquarters, Cork, T12 X8N6, IE
Last Update: 23/02/2026
At Johnson Controls we transform the environments where people live, work, learn and play. As the global leader in smart, healthy, and sustainable buildings, our mission is to reimagine the performance of buildings to serve people, places, and the planet. Fire safety i...

TDK
2-5-1 Nihonbashi, Chuo-ku, 103-6128, JP
Last Update: 24/09/2026
TDK Corporation is a world leader in electronic solutions for the smart society based in Tokyo, Japan. Built on a foundation of material sciences mastery, TDK welcomes societal transformation by resolutely remaining at the forefront of technological evolution. It was es...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Johnson Controls Fire Detection







TDK






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Johnson Controls Fire Detection in 2026.
Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for TDK in 2026.
Incident History - Johnson Controls Fire Detection (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Johnson Controls Fire Detection cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - TDK (X = Date, Y = Severity)
TDK cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Johnson Controls Fire Detection

TDK
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.