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

Comparison Overview

Makati Development CorporationMakati Development Corporation
VS
PCL ConstructionPCL Construction
Makati Development Corporation

Makati Development Corporation

1F Bonifacio Technology Center, 31st cor 2nd Ave.,, Taguig, undefined, 1634, PH

Last Update: 12/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.mdc.com.ph/
765/1000Fair

MAKATI DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ayala Land, Inc., the leading real estate development company in the Philippines. In 1950, MDC was the construction division of Ayala Corporation, the company that developed Makati into a premier financia...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:5,817
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
PCL Construction

PCL Construction

9915-56th Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, CA, T6E 5L7

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.pcl.com
771/1000Fair

PCL is a group of independent construction companies that carries out work across Canada, the United States, the Caribbean, and in Australia. These diverse operations in the civil infrastructure, heavy industrial, and buildings markets are supported by a strategic prese...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:12,124
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Makati Development Corporation

Makati Development Corporation

-
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
PCL Construction

PCL Construction

-
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 Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Makati Development Corporation in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PCL Construction in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Makati Development Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Makati Development Corporation 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 - PCL Construction (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PCL Construction cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Makati Development Corporation

Makati Development Corporation

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
PCL Construction

PCL Construction

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
PCL546072525

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

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.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

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.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

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.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

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.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

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.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9