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

Comparison Overview

Procter & Gamble DeutschlandProcter & Gamble Deutschland
VS
CelesticaCelestica
Procter & Gamble Deutschland

Procter & Gamble Deutschland

Sulzbacher Strasse 40, Schwalbach am Taunus, DE

Last Update: 24/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://de.pg.com/
764/1000Fair

Procter & Gamble (P&G) bietet Verbrauchern auf der ganzen Welt eines der stärksten Portfolios mit qualitativ hochwertigen und führenden Marken wie Always®, Ambi Pur®, Ariel®, Bounty®, Braun®, Charmin®, Crest®, Dawn®, Downy®, Fairy®, Febreze®, Gain®, Gillette®, Head&Shou...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:24
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Celestica

Celestica

5140 Yonge St, Toronto, M2N 6L7, CA

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.celestica.com
812/1000Good

Celestica is a technology leader dedicated to driving customer success and market advancements. With deep expertise in design, engineering, manufacturing, supply chain and platform solutions, Celestica enables critical data center infrastructure for AI, cloud, and hybri...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:15,374
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Procter & Gamble Deutschland

Procter & Gamble Deutschland

-
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
Celestica

Celestica

-
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 Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Procter & Gamble Deutschland in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Celestica in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Procter & Gamble Deutschland (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Procter & Gamble Deutschland 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 - Celestica (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Celestica 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...
Procter & Gamble Deutschland

Procter & Gamble Deutschland

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Celestica

Celestica

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67866
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67863
SUMMARY

In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-19026
SUMMARY

H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-19025
SUMMARY

H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA