Comparison Overview
L3 Technologies

L3 Technologies
600 Third Ave, New York, 10016, US
Last Update: 30/03/2026
With headquarters in New York City and approximately 31,000 employees worldwide, L3 develops advanced defense technologies and commercial solutions in pilot training, aviation security, night vision and EO/IR, weapons, maritime systems and space. The company reported 20...

Saab
Olof Palmes gata 17, Stockholm, SE
Last Update: 01/04/2026
As a leading defence and security company, we offer solutions that range from the depths of the oceans to high in the sky, on land and in cyberspace, to keep people and society safe. Empowered by our 22,000 talented people, we constantly push the boundaries of technolo...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

L3 Technologies







Saab






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for L3 Technologies in 2026.
Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Saab in 2026.
Incident History - L3 Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)
L3 Technologies cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Saab (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Saab cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

L3 Technologies

Saab
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.