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

Comparison Overview

Parker LordParker Lord
VS
MetsoMetso
Parker Lord

Parker Lord

111 LORD Drive, Cary, 27511, US

Last Update: 27/01/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.lord.com
754/1000Fair

Parker Hannifin, a Fortune 250 global leader in motion and control technologies. For more than 100 years, the Parker has engineered the success of its customers in a wide range of diversified industrial and aerospace markets. The company's products are vital to virtual...

NAICS:3332
NAICS Definition:Industrial Machinery Manufacturing
Employees:2,428
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Metso

Metso

Rauhalanpuisto 9, P.O. Box 1000, Espoo, Uusimaa, FI, 02230

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.metso.com/
781/1000Fair

Metso is a frontrunner in sustainable technologies, end-to-end solutions and services for the aggregates, minerals processing and metals refining industries globally.  By improving our customers’ energy and water efficiency, increasing their productivity, and reducing ...

NAICS:3332
NAICS Definition:Industrial Machinery Manufacturing
Employees:20,240
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Parker Lord

Parker Lord

-
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
Metso

Metso

-
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 Industrial Machinery Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Parker Lord in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Industrial Machinery Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Metso in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Parker Lord (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Parker Lord 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 - Metso (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Metso 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...
Parker Lord

Parker Lord

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Metso

Metso

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67978
SUMMARY

An issue in the SBN UDP interface of NASA cFS v7.0.1 allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via transmitting a crafted SBN frame.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-03
UPDATED
Date2026-08-03
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67673
SUMMARY

A stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the cmd_edl function of OreSat Firmware v1.0. The vulnerability is triggered when processing the edl fw_flash command, where the <filename> argument is copied to a 64-byte stack buffer via memcpy without proper length validation. An attacker with physical access to the UART3 serial interface can exploit this vulnerability by sending a maliciously crafted command with an oversized filename parameter,

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-03
UPDATED
Date2026-08-03
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-48399
SUMMARY

Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by a Violation of Secure Design Principles vulnerability that could result in a Security feature bypass. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass security measures and gain unauthorized read access. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-03
UPDATED
Date2026-08-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-48333
SUMMARY

Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by an Incorrect Authorization vulnerability that could result in privilege escalation. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability to gain elevated privileges. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-03
UPDATED
Date2026-08-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-48331
SUMMARY

Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could result in privilege escalation. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. Scope is changed.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-03
UPDATED
Date2026-08-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9