Comparison Overview

Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals)

VS

Dynamic Engineering

Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals)

900 E. Whitcomb Ave., Madison Heights, Michigan, 48071, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Founded in 1977, Martin Fluid Power includes five distribution locations in the US, plus locations in England and Taiwan. MFP Seals represents a culmination of bringing together our Design, Engineering, Machining, Molding, Kitting, and Die Cutting departments. Today we are focused on designing, engineering and manufacturing, the highest quality seals, made in the USA. MFP Seals, a division of Martin Fluid Power, is focused on providing you superior service, an effortless experience and access to our sealing devices worldwide. Through our website, stocking locations and authorized distributors, our products are available wherever you are. The MFP Seals Manufacturing division encompasses our research, development, design, engineering, CNC machining, injection molding and die cutting departments. The focus of this division is to provide our customers with the highest level of engineered success, from initial plan to final production, throughout our product line. Whether we are working for a customer, enhancing the capability of an existing design, or engineering an entirely new seal, our team utilizes the latest technology to achieve the best results. Finite Element Analysis and state-of-the-art measuring systems are among the tools used to achieve the capabilities, tolerances and engineering accuracy our customers have come to expect from us.. The capability of a seal’s design is not only based on precision engineering, but also in the materials and machinery used to manufacture it. MFP Seals not only tests the compounds we use in the production of our seals, we also specially blend compounds to enhance specific properties based on the intended use of the product. From there we determine what type of manufacturing is necessary to achieve the optimal product. From start to finish, our goal is Sealing in Success™, the successful performance of our products, and the success of the businesses worldwide that depend on our products every day.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 71
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Dynamic Engineering

654 N. Sam Houston Pkwy E, Houston, TX, 77060, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Dynamic was founded in 1985 as an Engineering Design Firm to primarily serve the Fine Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Markets. Dynamic has over 3000 successful Engineering Engagements, with Scope generally including Technology, Engineering Design, and Owner’s Engineering Services. Since relocating its headquarters to Houston in 2007, Dynamic has expanded into Proprietary Equipment Sales and Project Development and has increased activities in traditional energy, renewable chemicals & fuels, and high purity minerals. Recent international engagements include projects in India, US, China, Taiwan, Saudi Arabia, Korea, Japan & Russia.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 163
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/martin-fluid-power.jpeg
Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals)
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dynamic-engineering.jpeg
Dynamic Engineering
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals)
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Dynamic Engineering
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) in 2025.

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Dynamic Engineering in 2025.

Incident History — Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Dynamic Engineering (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Dynamic Engineering cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/martin-fluid-power.jpeg
Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals)
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dynamic-engineering.jpeg
Dynamic Engineering
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Dynamic Engineering company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Dynamic Engineering company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company.

In the current year, Dynamic Engineering company and Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Dynamic Engineering company nor Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Dynamic Engineering company nor Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Dynamic Engineering company nor Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company nor Dynamic Engineering company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) nor Dynamic Engineering holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company nor Dynamic Engineering company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Dynamic Engineering company employs more people globally than Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) company, reflecting its scale as a Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) nor Dynamic Engineering holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) nor Dynamic Engineering holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) nor Dynamic Engineering holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) nor Dynamic Engineering holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) nor Dynamic Engineering holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Martin Fluid Power (MFP Seals) nor Dynamic Engineering holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H