Comparison Overview

Orange

VS

Nokia

Orange

111, Quai du Président Roosevelt, None, Issy-les-Moulineaux, Île-de-France, FR, 92130
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 0 and 549

Orange is one of the world’s leading telecommunications operators with revenues of 40.3 billion euros in 2024 and 127,000 employees worldwide at 31 December 2024, including 71,000 employees in France. The Group has a total customer base of 291 million customers worldwide at 31 December 2024, including 253 million mobile customers and 22 million fixed broadband customers. The Group is present in 26 countries. Orange is also a leading provider of global IT and telecommunication services to multinational companies under the brand Orange Business. In February 2023, the Group presented its strategic plan « Lead the future », built on a new business model and guided by responsibility and efficiency. « Lead the future » capitalizes on network excellence to reinforce Orange's leadership in service quality.

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 132,461
Subsidiaries: 26
12-month incidents
5
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

Nokia

Karakaari 7, Espoo, Southern Finland, 02610, FI
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

At Nokia, we create technology that helps the world act together. As a B2B technology innovation leader, we are pioneering the future where networks meet cloud to realize the full potential of digital in every industry. Through networks that sense, think and act, we work with our customers and partners to create the digital services and applications of the future. For our latest updates, please visit us online www.nokia.com To view open positions and to apply, please visit: www.nokia.com/careers

NAICS: 517
NAICS Definition: Telecommunications
Employees: 91,765
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/orange.jpeg
Orange
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/nokia.jpeg
Nokia
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
Orange
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Nokia
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

Orange has 747.46% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Average (This Year)

Nokia has 69.49% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Orange cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Nokia cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/orange.jpeg
Orange
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Exploitation de données personnelles volées, Ingénierie sociale, SIM swapping
Motivation: Fraude financière, Vol d'identité, Accès non autorisé à des comptes en ligne
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Motivation: Disrupt services, Eavesdropping on vital communications, Exfiltrating sensitive information
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nokia.jpeg
Nokia
Incidents

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

FAQ

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

Orange company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Nokia company.

In the current year, Orange company has reported more cyber incidents than Nokia company.

Orange company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Nokia company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Orange company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Nokia company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Nokia company and Orange company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither Orange company nor Nokia company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Orange nor Nokia holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Orange company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Nokia company.

Orange company employs more people globally than Nokia company, reflecting its scale as a Telecommunications.

Neither Orange nor Nokia holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Orange nor Nokia holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Orange nor Nokia holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Orange nor Nokia holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Orange nor Nokia holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Orange nor Nokia 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