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

Comparison Overview

PraderLosinger SAPraderLosinger SA
VS
FerrovialFerrovial
PraderLosinger SA

PraderLosinger SA

Route de Vissigen 110, Sion, 1950, CH

Last Update: 21/12/2025

View Profile
754/1000Fair

PraderLosinger opère depuis 1925. Grâce à ses ambassadeurs, jeunes gens du métier et de la maison attachés à des régions spécifiques du Valais, elle répond en connaissance de cause à vos demandes les plus spécifiques. Prenez rendez-vous, exposez vos attentes et nos solu...

NAICS:237
NAICS Definition:Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Employees:55
Subsidiaries:100
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Ferrovial

Ferrovial

Amsterdam, NL

Last Update: 18/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.ferrovial.com
814/1000Good

Ferrovial is a leading global infrastructure company transforming highways, airports, and energy around the world. Its distinctive integrated business model supports the entire lifecycle of complex projects, from design and financing to construction, operation and maint...

NAICS:237
NAICS Definition:Heavy and Civil Engineering Construction
Employees:12,658
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
PraderLosinger SA

PraderLosinger SA

-
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
Ferrovial

Ferrovial

-
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 Civil Engineering Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PraderLosinger SA in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Civil Engineering Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ferrovial in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - PraderLosinger SA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PraderLosinger SA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Ferrovial cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
PraderLosinger SA

PraderLosinger SA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Ferrovial

Ferrovial

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1