Ring
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 650 and 699
Making Neighborhoods Safer
NAICS: 334
NAICS Definition: Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Employees: 1,682
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3
Comparison Overview
Ring
VS
Apple
Apple
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 700 and 749
We’re a diverse collective of thinkers and doers, continually reimagining what’s possible to help us all do what we love in new ways. And the same innovation that goes into our products also applies to our practices — strengthening our commitment to leave the world better than we found it. This is where your work can make a difference in people’s lives. Including your own. Apple is an equal opportunity employer that is committed to inclusion and diversity. Visit apple.com/careers to learn more.
NAICS: 334
NAICS Definition: Computer and Electronic Product Manufacturing
Employees: 161,773
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
11
Known data breaches
8
Attack type number
4
Compliance Badges Comparison
Security & Compliance Standards Overview
Ring
ISO 27001
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
Not verified
GDPR
Not verified
PCI DSS
Not verified
HIPAA
Not verified
Apple
ISO 27001
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
Not verified
GDPR
Not verified
PCI DSS
Not verified
HIPAA
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Ring
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Apple
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Computers and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)
Ring has 257.14% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Computers and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)
Apple has 3828.57% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History — Ring (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Ring cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
Incident History — Apple (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Apple cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
Notable Incidents
Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company
Apple
Incidents
Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Physical Access to Device, Insider Threat (Former Employee), Social Engineering (Trust Exploitation)
Motivation: Financial Gain, Reputation/Influence (Leaking Exclusive Information)
Blog: Blog
Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Malicious image file, Memory manipulation
Motivation: Targeted attacks against high-value individuals, Potential mass exploitation post-patch
Blog: Blog
Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Network
Motivation: Remote code execution, system compromise, memory corruption, unauthorized process termination, system crashes
Blog: Blog
FAQ
Apple company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ring company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.
Apple company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Ring company.
In the current year, Apple company has reported more cyber incidents than Ring company.
Apple company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Ring company has not reported such incidents publicly.
Both Apple company and Ring company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.
Both Apple company and Ring company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.
Apple company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Ring company has not reported such incidents publicly.
Neither Ring nor Apple holds any compliance certifications.
Neither company holds any compliance certifications.
Ring company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Apple company.
Apple company employs more people globally than Ring company, reflecting its scale as a Computers and Electronics Manufacturing.
Neither Ring nor Apple holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.
Neither Ring nor Apple holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.
Neither Ring nor Apple holds ISO 27001 certification.
Neither Ring nor Apple holds PCI DSS certification.
Neither Ring nor Apple holds HIPAA certification.
Neither Ring nor Apple holds GDPR certification.
Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)
Description
Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
References
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/0276479e7d0e280e0f8d26fa567d3b7aa97a516f
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/05fe6686a97fa0bcd3cf157805b3612033f975bc
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/3240d856d942727372a705252f7c8c115394a41e
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/19.2.16
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/20.3.14
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/21.0.1
- https://github.com/angular/angular/security/advisories/GHSA-58c5-g7wp-6w37
Description
Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/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:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description
Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/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
Description
Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description
Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
