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

Comparison Overview

MarquipWardUnitedMarquipWardUnited
VS
SulzerSulzer
MarquipWardUnited

MarquipWardUnited

1300 North Airport Road, Phillips, WI, 54555, US

Last Update: 29/01/2026

View Profile
746/1000Moderate

MarquipWardUnited, a BW Papersystems company, manufacturers machines for the corrugated box and paper converting industries. MWU Corrugators, Rotary Die Cutters, Flexo Folder Gluers and Sheeters create sheets and boxes to allow the world to ship and package your favor...

NAICS:333
NAICS Definition:Machinery Manufacturing
Employees:231
Subsidiaries:34
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Sulzer

Sulzer

Neuwiesenstrasse 15, Winterthur, 8401, CH

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.sulzer.com
767/1000Fair

Sulzer is a global leader in critical applications for core infrastructure and processes for large essential industries around the world. We ensure the security, quality and durability of critical goods and services by supporting energy security, natural resource manage...

NAICS:333
NAICS Definition:Machinery Manufacturing
Employees:10,639
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
MarquipWardUnited

MarquipWardUnited

-
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
Sulzer

Sulzer

-
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 MarquipWardUnited in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Machinery Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Sulzer in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - MarquipWardUnited (X = Date, Y = Severity)

MarquipWardUnited 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 - Sulzer (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Sulzer 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...
MarquipWardUnited

MarquipWardUnited

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Sulzer

Sulzer

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67866
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67863
SUMMARY

In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-19026
SUMMARY

H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-19025
SUMMARY

H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA