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

Comparison Overview

APLAPL
VS
EquinorEquinor
APL

APL

N/A

Last Update: 06/12/2025

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
www.nov.com/APL
746/1000Moderate

Purposeful partnership. Precision performance. Uninterrupted uptime. Our APL experts continuously develop cost-efficient designs that are fit for purpose, whilst advancing engineering philosophies to enhance our already cutting-edge technology and processes for the i...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Equinor

Equinor

Forusbeen 50, Stavanger, Rogaland, NO, 4035

Last Update: 07/10/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.equinor.com/
815/1000Good

We're Equinor, an international energy company with a proud history. Formerly Statoil, we are 20,000 committed colleagues developing oil, gas, wind and solar energy in more than 30 countries worldwide. We’re the largest operator in Norway, among the world’s largest offs...

NAICS:211
NAICS Definition:Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees:16,622
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
APL

APL

-
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
Equinor

Equinor

-
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 Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for APL in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Equinor in 2026.

Incidents

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

APL 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 - Equinor (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Equinor 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...
APL

APL

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Equinor

Equinor

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-93892
SUMMARY

IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 5.0.0 through 5.0.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to exposure of session tokens in the HTML response.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
REFERENCES
CVE-2026-93891
SUMMARY

IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 5.0.0 through 5.0.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to an XML external entity (XXE) injection flaw.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
REFERENCES
CVE-2026-92832
SUMMARY

IBM Aspera Enterprise WebApps 1.0.0 through 1.0.6 could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.5
REFERENCES
CVE-2026-85457
SUMMARY

IBM Planning Analytics 2.0, and 2.1 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a stack-based buffer overflow.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
REFERENCES
CVE-2026-84418
SUMMARY

IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 can allow a man-in-the-middle attacker to present a forged TLS certificate, intercept the connection, and capture the IAM bearer Authorization header automatically attached by the session adapter. The captured token grants full platform-scope tenant API access, enabling the attacker to read and manipulate the victim's DataStage projects, flows, assets, and pipeline definitions. This is client-side SDK code running on the user's own machine, so exploitation requires an external network interceptor rather than a co-tenant in the shared cluster.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-12
UPDATED
Date2026-10-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
REFERENCES