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

Comparison Overview

NVIDIA AINVIDIA AI
VS
ASUSASUS
NVIDIA AI

NVIDIA AI

2788 San Tomas Expressway, Santa Clara, 95051, US

Last Update: 13/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://nvda.ws/2nfcPK3
753/1000Fair

Explore the latest breakthroughs made possible with AI. From deep learning model training and large-scale inference to enhancing operational efficiencies and customer experience, discover how AI is driving innovation and redefining the way organizations operate across...

NAICS:3341
NAICS Definition:Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Employees:1
Subsidiaries:17
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
ASUS

ASUS

No.15, Lide Road, Taipei City, 112, TW

Last Update: 22/07/2026

View Profile
Between 550 and 599
http://www.asus.com
550/1000Very Poor

ASUS is a global technology leader delivering incredible experiences that enhance the lives of people everywhere. World renowned for continuously reimagining today’s technologies for tomorrow, ASUS puts users first In Search of Incredible to provide the world’s most inn...

NAICS:3341
NAICS Definition:Computer and Peripheral Equipment Manufacturing
Employees:17,685
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
5
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
4

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
NVIDIA AI

NVIDIA AI

-
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
ASUS

ASUS

-
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 Computer Hardware Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for NVIDIA AI in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Computer Hardware Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

ASUS has 385.44% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - NVIDIA AI (X = Date, Y = Severity)

NVIDIA AI cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

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

ASUS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
NVIDIA AI

NVIDIA AI

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
ASUS

ASUS

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ASU1784744702
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ASU1779539103
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
DIETOYFILASUCITBENMAGLINYAMFIATHEBAN1774023969

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-19756
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in Dromara lamp-cloud up to 5.10.0. This affects an unknown part of the file DefGenProjectController.java of the component Code Generator. Such manipulation of the argument outputDir/parent/projectPrefix leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-19753
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Model Context Protocol mcp-rdf-explorer 1.0.0. Affected is the function explore_url of the file src/mcp-rdf-explorer/server.py of the component MCP Server. Performing a manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-73843
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.2 and 1.1.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go served caller-facing management APIs on the externally reachable agent listener without authentication, allowing network-reachable attackers to invoke /api/proxy/ and /api/exec/ operations, proxy the data-plane Kubernetes API, and execute commands in workload pods in multi-cluster deployments. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.2 and 1.1.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-73842
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go exposed /api/proxy/, /api/exec/, and /api/wirelogs/ on an internal listener without requiring a client certificate or token, allowing any network-reachable caller to read tenant Kubernetes Secrets, mutate workloads, and execute commands across connected data planes. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-73841
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. From 1.2.0-rc.1 until 1.2.0, internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/exec.go and internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/wirelogs.go authorize component:exec and wirelogs:view using the caller-supplied project query parameter instead of comp.Spec.Owner.ProjectName, allowing a user with a project-scoped grant to execute commands in and read wirelogs from components owned by other projects in the same namespace. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8