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

Comparison Overview

Pittsburgh Regional TransitPittsburgh Regional Transit
VS
STEFSTEF
Pittsburgh Regional Transit

Pittsburgh Regional Transit

345 6th Ave, Pittsburgh, 15222, US

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 600 and 649
http://www.ridePRT.org
646/1000Poor

Pittsburgh Regional Transit, formerly Port Authority of Allegheny County, is the nation’s 26th largest transit agency. Our 2,600 employees operate, maintain, and support bus, rail, and incline service in the Pittsburgh metro area.

NAICS:484
NAICS Definition:Truck Transportation
Employees:883
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
STEF

STEF

93 Boulevard Malesherbes, Paris, 75008, FR

Last Update: 14/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.stef.com
756/1000Fair

STEF group is the European leader for temperature controlled logistics and transport. Our 22,000 employees in 8 countries are dedicated to serve everyday agrifood, distribution, foodservice and seafood players with the highest standards of security, rapidity and quality...

NAICS:484
NAICS Definition:Truck Transportation
Employees:12,305
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Pittsburgh Regional Transit

Pittsburgh Regional Transit

-
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
STEF

STEF

-
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 Truck Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Pittsburgh Regional Transit in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Truck Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for STEF in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Pittsburgh Regional Transit (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pittsburgh Regional Transit cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - STEF (X = Date, Y = Severity)

STEF 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...
Pittsburgh Regional Transit

Pittsburgh Regional Transit

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
PIT000122824
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
PIT820090225
STEF

STEF

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-93436
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 fails to properly clean up decode-side metadata for rejected inference requests in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments. Remote attackers can submit requests with max_tokens=0 to exhaust decode-worker memory without bound until the worker restarts.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-17
UPDATED
Date2026-09-17
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:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-93435
SUMMARY

redis-parser through 3.0.0 contains a denial of service vulnerability in the RESP protocol parser that allows malicious Redis endpoints to crash the client process through unbounded recursion on nested arrays. Attackers can send crafted RESP byte streams with repeated array headers that exhaust the V8 call stack, causing an uncaught RangeError that terminates the Node.js process without triggering error handling callbacks.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-17
UPDATED
Date2026-09-17
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:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-87701
SUMMARY

Improper neutralization of special elements in output used by a downstream component ('injection') in Azure Cosmos DB allows an authorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-17
UPDATED
Date2026-09-17
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-85917
SUMMARY

Server-side request forgery (ssrf) in Azure AI Foundry allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-17
UPDATED
Date2026-09-17
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-2026-85889
SUMMARY

Missing authentication for critical function in Azure AI Foundry allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-17
UPDATED
Date2026-09-17
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