Comparison Overview

Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS

VS

ATL

Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS

1403 North Maish Rd., Frankfort, 46041, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Phillips Saw & Tool, Inc. is a family-owned business proudly serving the cutting tool industry since 1989. Located in Frankfort, Indiana, we specialize in precision sharpening and custom tooling solutions for a wide range of industrial applications. Our 11,000 sq. ft. facility is equipped with state-of-the-art CNC machinery, including several robotic grinding systems that enable around-the-clock production. While sharpening remains our core strength, we’re expanding into advanced manufacturing—offering custom saw blades and niche-size tooling designed to meet the unique needs of our customers. We’re passionate about quality, innovation, and customer service. Whether you need high-performance tooling solutions, expert sharpening, or collaboration on a custom blade project, Phillips Saw & Tool is ready to deliver. Let’s build something sharp together.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 11
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

ATL

Unit E, Progress Road, High Wycombe, HP12 4JD, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

WELCOME TO ATL! Established in 1980 in High Wycombe, 50km from London, ATL has steadily developed a reputation as a global leader in CVD R&D programme development and execution and Systems Engineering. We have successfully completed over 300 projects globally, working with both some of the leading engineering firms of the world and smaller organisations. We have undertaken projects in all the major industries requiring extreme environment coating development. Our projects have led to major technical breakthroughs, such as hybrid ceramic jet engines, ceramic cladding for nuclear fuel rods and critical components for nuclear fusion reactors. We have executed projects from $5,000 to $5 million, and are experienced working on all phases of coating development. Our particular success is drawing on our breadth and depth of experience in designing your system or R&D programme to ensure efficient and successful execution. Our proven process is for the initial engagement to be with one of our directors from the outset, who have been involved with the company since its formation, who are supported by a growing team of talented systems engineers and material scientists. We look forward to working with you on your project.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 24
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/phillips-saw-&-tool-inc-.jpeg
Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS
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/archer-technicoat-ltd.jpeg
ATL
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
Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
ATL
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS in 2025.

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ATL in 2025.

Incident History — Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

ATL cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/phillips-saw-&-tool-inc-.jpeg
Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/archer-technicoat-ltd.jpeg
ATL
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ATL company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, ATL company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company.

In the current year, ATL company and Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither ATL company nor Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither ATL company nor Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither ATL company nor Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company nor ATL company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS nor ATL holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company nor ATL company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

ATL company employs more people globally than Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS company, reflecting its scale as a Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS nor ATL holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS nor ATL holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS nor ATL holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS nor ATL holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS nor ATL holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Phillips Saw & Tool - PSAWS nor ATL 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