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

Comparison Overview

Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda.Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda.
VS
Atlas Copco GroupAtlas Copco Group
Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda.

Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda.

Rua Fernão Dias, 14, Cajamar, São Paulo, 07790-560, BR

Last Update: 19/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.metalplan.com.br
744/1000Moderate

A Metalplan, primeiro fabricante de compressores do mundo a conquistar a certificação ISO 50001 - Gestão de Energia - é líder no mercado de compressores de parafuso até 25 hp no Brasil. Nossos equipamentos para ar comprimido, gases e refrigeração industrial são 100% na...

NAICS:333
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:68
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Atlas Copco Group

Atlas Copco Group

Sickla Industriväg 19, Stockholm, 10523, SE

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
781/1000Fair

Atlas Copco Group enables technology that transforms the future. We innovate to develop products, services and solutions that are key to our customers’ success. Our four business areas offer compressed air and vacuum solutions, energy solutions, dewatering and industria...

NAICS:333
NAICS Definition:Machinery Manufacturing
Employees:48,857
Subsidiaries:57
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda.

Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda.

-
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
Atlas Copco Group

Atlas Copco Group

-
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 Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda. in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Machinery Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Atlas Copco Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda. 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 - Atlas Copco Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Atlas Copco Group 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...
Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda.

Metalplan Equipamentos Ltda.

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Atlas Copco Group

Atlas Copco Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
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:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9