Comparison Overview

Olympus Corporation

VS

Alcon

Olympus Corporation

Nishi-shinjuku 2-3-1 Shinjuku Monolith, None, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, JP, None
Last Update: 2025-12-09
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.olympus-global.com/

Olympus is passionate about creating customer-driven solutions for the medical industry. For more than 100 years, Olympus has focused on making people’s lives healthier, safer and more fulfilling by helping detect, prevent, and treat disease, furthering scientific research, and ensuring public safety. Olympus is headquartered in Tokyo, Japan, with more than 31,000 employees worldwide in nearly 40 countries and regions.

NAICS: 3391
NAICS Definition: Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Employees: 10,074
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Alcon

Avenue Louis-Casaï 58, Geneva, Switzerland, 1216, CH
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 750 and 799
http://www.alcon.com

Alcon helps people see brilliantly. As the global leader in eye care with a heritage spanning over 75 years, we offer the broadest portfolio of products to enhance sight and improve people’s lives. Our Surgical and Vision Care products touch the lives of more than 260 million people in over 140 countries each year living with conditions like cataracts, glaucoma, retinal diseases and refractive errors. Our more than 25,000 associates are enhancing the quality of life through innovative products, partnerships with Eye Care Professionals and programs that advance access to quality eye care. Learn more at www.alcon.com.

NAICS: 3391
NAICS Definition: Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Employees: 26,196
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/olympus-corp.jpeg
Olympus Corporation
—
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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/alcon.jpeg
Alcon
—
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
Olympus Corporation
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Alcon
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Medical Equipment Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Olympus Corporation in 2025.

Incidents vs Medical Equipment Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Alcon in 2025.

Incident History — Olympus Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Olympus Corporation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Alcon (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Alcon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/olympus-corp.jpeg
Olympus Corporation
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/alcon.jpeg
Alcon
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Email
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Alcon company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Olympus Corporation company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Alcon company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Olympus Corporation company has not reported any.

In the current year, Alcon company and Olympus Corporation company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Alcon company nor Olympus Corporation company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Alcon company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Olympus Corporation company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Alcon company nor Olympus Corporation company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Olympus Corporation company nor Alcon company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Olympus Corporation nor Alcon holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Alcon company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Olympus Corporation company.

Alcon company employs more people globally than Olympus Corporation company, reflecting its scale as a Medical Equipment Manufacturing.

Neither Olympus Corporation nor Alcon holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Olympus Corporation nor Alcon holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Olympus Corporation nor Alcon holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Olympus Corporation nor Alcon holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Olympus Corporation nor Alcon holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Olympus Corporation nor Alcon holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/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
References
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References