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

Comparison Overview

Pratt & Whitney CanadaPratt & Whitney Canada
VS
British AirwaysBritish Airways
Pratt & Whitney Canada

Pratt & Whitney Canada

1000 Marie-Victorin, None, Longueuil, None, CA, J4G 1A1

Last Update: 08/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.pwc.ca
767/1000Fair

A global leader in aerospace, P&WC is shaping the future of business, helicopter, regional and general aviation as well as auxiliary power generation with advanced engine technology. With over 104,000 engines produced, and over 65,000 engines in service, our operations ...

NAICS:481
NAICS Definition:Air Transportation
Employees:4,945
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
British Airways

British Airways

Harmondsworth, Middlesex, UB7 0GA, GB

Last Update: 15/05/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.ba.com
733/1000Moderate

As a global airline and the UK’s flag carrier, British Airways has been flying its customers to where they need to be for more than 100 years. The airline connects Britain with the world and the world with Britain, operating one of the most extensive international sched...

NAICS:481
NAICS Definition:Air Transportation
Employees:32,009
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
4

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Pratt & Whitney Canada

Pratt & Whitney Canada

-
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
British Airways

British Airways

-
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 Airlines and Aviation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Pratt & Whitney Canada in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Avg (This Year)

British Airways has 4.76% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Pratt & Whitney Canada (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pratt & Whitney Canada 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 - British Airways (X = Date, Y = Severity)

British Airways 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...
Pratt & Whitney Canada

Pratt & Whitney Canada

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
British Airways

British Airways

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
BRI1778826314
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
MOVBRIMGM1770602315
🔒 Incident : Breach
BRI0112623

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-58281
SUMMARY

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-10660
SUMMARY

The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-61870
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.4
CVE-2026-61861
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-61858
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8