Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

Linde Material HandlingLinde Material Handling
VS
John DeereJohn Deere
Linde Material Handling

Linde Material Handling

Schweinheimer Straße 34, Aschaffenburg, 63743, DE

Last Update: 28/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.linde-mh.com
759/1000Fair

Linde Material Handling is one of the world's leading manufacturers of forklift trucks and warehouse equipment. In Europe, the company is the market leader with the Linde and Fenwick (France) brands. Since 2006, Linde has been part of the KION Group. The KION Group is t...

NAICS:333
NAICS Definition:Machinery Manufacturing
Employees:4,461
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
John Deere

John Deere

Moline, 61265, US

Last Update: 13/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.deere.com/AboutUs
823/1000Good

It doesn’t matter if you’ve never driven a tractor, mowed a lawn, or operated a dozer. With John Deere’s role in helping produce food, fiber, fuel, and infrastructure, we work for every single person on the planet. It all started nearly 200 years ago with a steel plow...

NAICS:333
NAICS Definition:Machinery Manufacturing
Employees:53,435
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Linde Material Handling

Linde Material Handling

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
John Deere

John Deere

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Machinery Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Linde Material Handling in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Machinery Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for John Deere in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Linde Material Handling (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Linde Material Handling cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - John Deere (X = Date, Y = Severity)

John Deere cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Linde Material Handling

Linde Material Handling

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
John Deere

John Deere

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Linde Material Handling company and John Deere company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Linde Material Handling and John Deere, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Linde Material Handling and John Deere, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Linde Material Handling or John Deere ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Linde Material Handling or John Deere ?
Between Linde Material Handling and John Deere, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Linde Material Handling and John Deere, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-93740
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. Affected is the function formWlEncrypt of the file /boafrm/formWlEncrypt. The manipulation of the argument submit-url leads to buffer overflow. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS2
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-93739
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. This impacts the function formWlAc of the file /boafrm/formWlAc. Executing a manipulation of the argument submit-url can lead to buffer overflow. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-75885
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in the OpenShift console. Unauthenticated access to the `/api/devfile/` and `/api/devfile/samples/` endpoints allows a remote attacker to send crafted devfile payloads. This can lead to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), where the console pod makes requests to internal services and reflects partial responses to the attacker. Additionally, by sending repeated large requests without a specified content length, an attacker can cause unbounded memory growth, leading to a Denial of Service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-93894
SUMMARY

In Vinyl Cache before 9.0,2, workspace buffer overflow vulnerability was found in the .upper() and .lower() string type methods of VCL. This can be used as a remote denial of service (DoS) vector to make the child process segfault or assert, and then restart. Effectively exploiting this vulnerability requires prior knowledge about the VCL in use and the ability to craft a request that contains a string that is long enough to fill the remaining workspace at the call site while staying under the different request size limits (http_req_size, http_req_hdr_len, etc.).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/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:N/R:A/V:D/RE:L/U:Clear
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-93738
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. This affects the function formSchedule of the file /boafrm/formSchedule. Performing a manipulation of the argument webpage results in buffer overflow. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-18
UPDATED
Date2026-09-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1