Comparison Overview

Prysmian

VS

Tramontina

Prysmian

Via Chiese 6, Milan, 20126, IT
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 750 and 799

Prysmian is a global cabling solutions provider leading the energy transition and digital transformation. By leveraging its wide geographical footprint and extensive product range, its track record of technological leadership and innovation, and a strong customer base, the company is well-placed to capitalise on its leading positions and win in new, growing markets. Prysmian’s business strategy perfectly matches key market drivers by developing resilient, high-performing, sustainable and innovative cable solutions in the segments of Transmission, Power Grid, Electrification and Digital Solutions. Prysmian is a public company listed on the Italian Stock Exchange, with almost 150 years of experience, over 33,000 employees, 109 plants and 27 R&D centres in over 50 countries, and sales of over €15 billion in 2023.

NAICS: 30
NAICS Definition: Manufacturing
Employees: 14,379
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Tramontina

Av. 25 de Setembro, 1024 Bairro Tri√¢ngulo Carlos Barbosa, Rio Grande do Sul 95185-000, BR
Last Update: 2026-01-17

More than just numbers, what truly defines Tramontina is the constant effort to make people's lives better. The small iron mill founded by Valentin and Elisa Tramontina in 1911 in southern Brazil was the beginning of a group that now encompasses 9 manufacturing units and has kept the century-old tradition of delighting people with simple gestures. The secret for maintaining this essence is believing in people. Tramontina values each one of its over 10,000 employees so they can deliver functional, stylish products to the market, bringing inspiration to people's daily living and creating experiences to generate value and satisfy clients, consumers and communities. All this is apparent in the more than 22,000 items that carry the values of a unique brand. Kitchen utensils and equipment, appliances, tools for agriculture, gardening, industrial and automotive maintenance, construction, electrical hardware, wood and plastic furniture, and a wide range of ride-on equipment is manufactured for the domestic market and exported to over 120 countries. It is by doing beautiful things well that Tramontina and people are brought together. A global player, the company finds the necessary support to deliver solutions that can meet contemporary demands, combining productivity and going over and beyond targets for sustainable development through the environmental management program.

NAICS: 30
NAICS Definition: Manufacturing
Employees: 10,001
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/prysmian.jpeg
Prysmian
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/tramontina.jpeg
Tramontina
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
Prysmian
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Tramontina
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Prysmian in 2026.

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tramontina in 2026.

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

Prysmian cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Tramontina cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/prysmian.jpeg
Prysmian
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tramontina.jpeg
Tramontina
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Prysmian company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Tramontina company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Tramontina company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Prysmian company.

In the current year, Tramontina company and Prysmian company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Tramontina company nor Prysmian company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Tramontina company nor Prysmian company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Tramontina company nor Prysmian company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Prysmian company nor Tramontina company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Prysmian nor Tramontina holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Prysmian company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Tramontina company.

Prysmian company employs more people globally than Tramontina company, reflecting its scale as a Manufacturing.

Neither Prysmian nor Tramontina holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Prysmian nor Tramontina holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Prysmian nor Tramontina holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Prysmian nor Tramontina holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Prysmian nor Tramontina holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Prysmian nor Tramontina holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N