Comparison Overview

Ragle Inc

VS

Jurong Engineering Limited

Ragle Inc

5266 Vann Rd, Newburgh, Indiana, 47630-8485, US
Last Update: 2025-03-04 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799

Ragle Inc. is a highly diversified Highway and Bridge Contractor that specializes in highway, heavy civil, and commercial projects. It has been recognized as an industry leader for safety providing quality, on time performance for projects at competitive pricing. With its team of experienced project managers, engineers, and superintendents backed by a modern equipment fleet, it completes complex and demanding projects on time and within budget.

NAICS: 23
NAICS Definition: Construction
Employees: 151
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Jurong Engineering Limited

25, Tanjong Kling Road Singapore, 628050, SG
Last Update: 2025-05-06 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799

JEL is a leading engineering and construction company based in Singapore, with a network of companies spanning across Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. Since inception in 1971, JEL has reliably delivered successful projects in power & industrial plants in more than 30 countries. With multifaceted project management capabilities and a strong diverse workforce, JEL provides a full range of services in engineering, procurement, construction and maintenance across the world. With an outstanding track record, strong engineering expertise, and extensive range of experience, we partner customers to achieve success in new markets, challenges, and geographies.

NAICS: 23
NAICS Definition: Construction
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/ragle-inc.jpeg
Ragle Inc
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/jurong-engineering-limited.jpeg
Jurong Engineering Limited
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
Ragle Inc
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Jurong Engineering Limited
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Construction Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ragle Inc in 2025.

Incidents vs Construction Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Jurong Engineering Limited in 2025.

Incident History — Ragle Inc (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ragle Inc cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Jurong Engineering Limited (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Jurong Engineering Limited cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ragle-inc.jpeg
Ragle Inc
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jurong-engineering-limited.jpeg
Jurong Engineering Limited
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Jurong Engineering Limited company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ragle Inc company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Jurong Engineering Limited company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Ragle Inc company.

In the current year, Jurong Engineering Limited company and Ragle Inc company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Jurong Engineering Limited company nor Ragle Inc company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Jurong Engineering Limited company nor Ragle Inc company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Jurong Engineering Limited company nor Ragle Inc company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Ragle Inc company nor Jurong Engineering Limited company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Ragle Inc nor Jurong Engineering Limited holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Ragle Inc company nor Jurong Engineering Limited company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Ragle Inc company employs more people globally than Jurong Engineering Limited company, reflecting its scale as a Construction.

Neither Ragle Inc nor Jurong Engineering Limited holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ragle Inc nor Jurong Engineering Limited holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ragle Inc nor Jurong Engineering Limited holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ragle Inc nor Jurong Engineering Limited holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ragle Inc nor Jurong Engineering Limited holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ragle Inc nor Jurong Engineering Limited holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Deck Mate 1 executes firmware directly from an external EEPROM without verifying authenticity or integrity. An attacker with physical access can replace or reflash the EEPROM to run arbitrary code that persists across reboots. Because this design predates modern secure-boot or signed-update mechanisms, affected systems should be physically protected or retired from service. The vendor has not indicated that firmware updates are available for this legacy model.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
Description

Deck Mate 2 lacks a verified secure-boot chain and runtime integrity validation for its controller and display modules. Without cryptographic boot verification, an attacker with physical access can modify or replace the bootloader, kernel, or filesystem and gain persistent code execution on reboot. This weakness allows long-term firmware tampering that survives power cycles. The vendor indicates that more recent firmware updates strengthen update-chain integrity and disable physical update ports to mitigate related attack avenues.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
Description

Deck Mate 2's firmware update mechanism accepts packages without cryptographic signature verification, encrypts them with a single hard-coded AES key shared across devices, and uses a truncated HMAC for integrity validation. Attackers with access to the update interface - typically via the unit's USB update port - can craft or modify firmware packages to execute arbitrary code as root, allowing persistent compromise of the device's integrity and deck randomization process. Physical or on-premises access remains the most likely attack path, though network-exposed or telemetry-enabled deployments could theoretically allow remote exploitation if misconfigured. The vendor confirmed that firmware updates have been issued to correct these update-chain weaknesses and that USB update access has been disabled on affected units.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
Description

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS bc-fips on All (API modules), Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java LTS bcprov-lts8on on All (API modules) allows Excessive Allocation. This vulnerability is associated with program files core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCMSIV.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA224NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA3NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHAKENativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA512NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA384NativeDigest.Java. This issue affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS: from 2.1.0 through 2.1.1; Bouncy Castle for Java LTS: from 2.73.0 through 2.73.7.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/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:P/AU:N/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:Amber
Description

Wasmtime is a runtime for WebAssembly. In versions from 38.0.0 to before 38.0.3, the implementation of component-model related host-to-wasm trampolines in Wasmtime contained a bug where it's possible to carefully craft a component, which when called in a specific way, would crash the host with a segfault or assert failure. Wasmtime 38.0.3 has been released and is patched to fix this issue. There are no workarounds.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/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