Comparison Overview
Neogen Food Safety, North America

Neogen Food Safety, North America
620 Lesher Place, Lansing, 48912 , US
Last Update: 28/02/2026
At Neogen®, we are at the forefront of food security, with comprehensive solutions, global reach, dedicated experts, and expanded capabilities. Our enhanced geographic footprint, innovative product offerings, and digitization capabilities make us the ideal partner to ad...

Agilent Technologies
5301 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Santa Clara, 95051, US
Last Update: 11/09/2026
Agilent customers are finding new ways to treat cancer, ensure food, water, air, and medicine quality and safety, discover new drug treatments, research infectious diseases, and create alternative energy solutions for a greener planet. From start to finish, we have them...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Neogen Food Safety, North America







Agilent Technologies






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Biotechnology Research Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Neogen Food Safety, North America in 2026.
Incidents vs Biotechnology Research Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Agilent Technologies in 2026.
Incident History - Neogen Food Safety, North America (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Neogen Food Safety, North America cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Agilent Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Agilent Technologies cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Neogen Food Safety, North America

Agilent Technologies
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.