Comparison Overview

Navistar Inc

VS

General Motors

Navistar Inc

2701 Navistar Dr, Lisle, IL, US, 60532
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

We were Navistar, but we are getting back to our roots as International. Follow us at International and join us on the road ahead.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 7,015
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

General Motors

100 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan, US, 48243
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

General Motors’ vision is to create a world with Zero Crashes, Zero Emissions and Zero Congestion, and we have committed ourselves to leading the way toward this future. Today, we are in the midst of a transportation revolution, and we have the ambition, the talent and the technology to realize the safer, better and more sustainable world we want. As an open, inclusive company, we’re also creating an environment where everyone feels welcomed and valued for who they are. One team, where all ideas are considered and heard, where everyone can contribute to their fullest potential, with a culture based in respect, integrity, accountability and equality. Our team brings wide-ranging perspectives and experiences to solving the complex transportation challenges of today and tomorrow. For information on the GM Privacy Statement, please visit http://www.gm.com/privacy-statement.html

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 103,855
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/general-motors.jpeg
General Motors
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
Navistar Inc
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
General Motors
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Navistar Inc in 2025.

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

General Motors has 163.16% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Navistar Inc (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Navistar Inc cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — General Motors (X = Date, Y = Severity)

General Motors cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/navistar-inc.jpeg
Navistar Inc
Incidents
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/general-motors.jpeg
General Motors
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Compromised Credentials
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2022
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Exploitation of on-board ports
Motivation: High horsepower and resale value
Blog: Blog

FAQ

General Motors company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Navistar Inc company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

General Motors company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Navistar Inc company.

In the current year, General Motors company has reported more cyber incidents than Navistar Inc company.

Neither General Motors company nor Navistar Inc company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both General Motors company and Navistar Inc company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

General Motors company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Navistar Inc company has not reported such incidents publicly.

General Motors company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Navistar Inc company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Navistar Inc nor General Motors holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Navistar Inc company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to General Motors company.

General Motors company employs more people globally than Navistar Inc company, reflecting its scale as a Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.

Neither Navistar Inc nor General Motors holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Navistar Inc nor General Motors holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Navistar Inc nor General Motors holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Navistar Inc nor General Motors holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Navistar Inc nor General Motors holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Navistar Inc nor General Motors 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