Comparison Overview

Panasonic

VS

TE Connectivity

Panasonic

Ooaza Kadoma, 1006, Kadoma-shi, Osaka, 571-8501, JP
Last Update: 2026-01-17

Founded in 1918, and today a global leader in developing innovative technologies and solutions for wide-ranging applications in the consumer electronics, housing, automotive, industry, communications, and energy sectors worldwide, the Panasonic Group switched to an operating company system on April 1, 2022 with Panasonic Holdings Corporation serving as a holding company and eight companies positioned under its umbrella. The Group reported consolidated net sales of 8,496.4 billion yen for the year ended March 31, 2024.

NAICS: 335
NAICS Definition: Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing
Employees: 28,891
Subsidiaries: 11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

TE Connectivity

Galway, IE
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 800 and 849

TE Connectivity plc (NYSE: TEL) is a global industrial technology leader creating a safer, sustainable, productive and connected future. As a trusted innovation partner, our broad range of connectivity and sensor solutions enable the distribution of power, signal and data to advance next-generation transportation, energy networks, automated factories, data centers enabling artificial intelligence and more. Our more than 90,000 employees, including 10,000 engineers, work alongside customers in approximately 130 countries. In a world that is racing ahead, TE ensures that EVERY CONNECTION COUNTS.

NAICS: 335
NAICS Definition: Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing
Employees: 40,483
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/panasonic.jpeg
Panasonic
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/te-connectivity.jpeg
TE Connectivity
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
Panasonic
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
TE Connectivity
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Panasonic in 2026.

Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for TE Connectivity in 2026.

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

Panasonic cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — TE Connectivity (X = Date, Y = Severity)

TE Connectivity cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/panasonic.jpeg
Panasonic
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Misconfigured DNS CNAME records
Motivation: Spread malware and perpetrate online scams
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/te-connectivity.jpeg
TE Connectivity
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Panasonic company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas TE Connectivity company has not reported any.

In the current year, TE Connectivity company and Panasonic company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Panasonic company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while TE Connectivity company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Panasonic company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other TE Connectivity company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither TE Connectivity company nor Panasonic company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Panasonic company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while TE Connectivity company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Panasonic nor TE Connectivity holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Panasonic company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to TE Connectivity company.

TE Connectivity company employs more people globally than Panasonic company, reflecting its scale as a Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing.

Neither Panasonic nor TE Connectivity holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Panasonic nor TE Connectivity holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Panasonic nor TE Connectivity holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Panasonic nor TE Connectivity holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Panasonic nor TE Connectivity holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Panasonic nor TE Connectivity holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Typemill is a flat-file, Markdown-based CMS designed for informational documentation websites. A reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) exists in the login error view template `login.twig` of versions 2.19.1 and below. The `username` value can be echoed back without proper contextual encoding when authentication fails. An attacker can execute script in the login page context. This issue has been fixed in version 2.19.2.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

A DOM-based Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the DomainCheckerApp class within domain/script.js of Sourcecodester Domain Availability Checker v1.0. The vulnerability occurs because the application improperly handles user-supplied data in the createResultElement method by using the unsafe innerHTML property to render domain search results.

Description

A Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability exists in Sourcecodester Modern Image Gallery App v1.0 within the gallery/upload.php component. The application fails to properly validate uploaded file contents. Additionally, the application preserves the user-supplied file extension during the save process. This allows an unauthenticated attacker to upload arbitrary PHP code by spoofing the MIME type as an image, leading to full system compromise.

Description

A UNIX symbolic link following issue in the jailer component in Firecracker version v1.13.1 and earlier and 1.14.0 on Linux may allow a local host user with write access to the pre-created jailer directories to overwrite arbitrary host files via a symlink attack during the initialization copy at jailer startup, if the jailer is executed with root privileges. To mitigate this issue, users should upgrade to version v1.13.2 or 1.14.1 or above.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 6.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H/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

An information disclosure vulnerability exists in the /srvs/membersrv/getCashiers endpoint of the Aptsys gemscms backend platform thru 2025-05-28. This unauthenticated endpoint returns a list of cashier accounts, including names, email addresses, usernames, and passwords hashed using MD5. As MD5 is a broken cryptographic function, the hashes can be easily reversed using public tools, exposing user credentials in plaintext. This allows remote attackers to perform unauthorized logins and potentially gain access to sensitive POS operations or backend functions.