Comparison Overview

Pfizer

VS

Lupin

Pfizer

New York, New York, 10017, US
Last Update: 2025-11-20

We’re celebrating over 175 years of daring scientific innovation—and we’re not done yet. Let’s outdo yesterday. Protect your health at PfizerForAll.com For additional information on our guidelines, please visit http://www.pfizer.com/community-guidelines

NAICS: 3254
NAICS Definition: Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing
Employees: 102,145
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Lupin

3rd Floor, Kalpataru Inspire, Off Western Express Highway, Santa Cruz East, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400055, IN
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

Lupin Limited is a global pharmaceutical leader headquartered in Mumbai, India, with products distributed in over 100 markets. Lupin specializes in pharmaceutical products, including branded and generic formulations, complex generics, biotechnology products, and active pharmaceutical ingredients. Trusted by healthcare professionals and consumers globally, the company enjoys a strong position in India and the U.S. across multiple therapy areas, including respiratory, cardiovascular, anti-diabetic, anti-infective, gastrointestinal, central nervous system, and women’s health. Lupin has 15 state-of-the-art manufacturing sites and 7 research centers globally, along with a dedicated workforce of over 22,000 professionals. Lupin is committed to improving patient health outcomes through its subsidiaries – Lupin Diagnostics, Lupin Digital Health, and Lupin Manufacturing Solutions.

NAICS: 3254
NAICS Definition: Pharmaceutical and Medicine Manufacturing
Employees: 19,409
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pfizer.jpeg
Pfizer
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/lupin.jpeg
Lupin
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
Pfizer
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Lupin
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Pfizer in 2025.

Incidents vs Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lupin in 2025.

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

Pfizer cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Lupin cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pfizer.jpeg
Pfizer
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lupin.jpeg
Lupin
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, Lupin company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Pfizer company.

In the current year, Lupin company and Pfizer company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Lupin company nor Pfizer company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Lupin company nor Pfizer company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Lupin company nor Pfizer company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Pfizer company nor Lupin company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Pfizer nor Lupin holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Pfizer company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Lupin company.

Pfizer company employs more people globally than Lupin company, reflecting its scale as a Pharmaceutical Manufacturing.

Neither Pfizer nor Lupin holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Pfizer nor Lupin holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Pfizer nor Lupin holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Pfizer nor Lupin holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Pfizer nor Lupin holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Pfizer nor Lupin 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