Comparison Overview

Rockwell Automation

VS

Siemens

Rockwell Automation

1201 South Second Street, None, Milwaukee, WI, US, 53204
Last Update: 2025-11-22

At Rockwell Automation, we connect the imaginations of people with the potential of technology to expand what is humanly possible, making the world more intelligent, more connected and more productive. Throughout the world, our flagship Allen-Bradley® and Rockwell Software® product brands are recognized for innovation and excellence.

NAICS: 33325
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 21,282
Subsidiaries: 17
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Siemens

Werner-von-Siemens-Straße 1, None, Munich, None, DE, 80333
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 800 and 849

Siemens AG (Berlin and Munich) is a leading technology company focused on industry, infrastructure, mobility, and healthcare. The company’s purpose is to create technology to transform the everyday, for everyone. By combining the real and the digital worlds, Siemens empowers customers to accelerate their digital and sustainability transformations, making factories more efficient, cities more livable, and transportation more sustainable. Siemens also owns a majority stake in the publicly listed company Siemens Healthineers, a leading global medical technology provider pioneering breakthroughs in healthcare. For everyone. Everywhere. Sustainably. In fiscal 2024, which ended on September 30, 2024, the Siemens Group generated revenue of €75.9 billion and net income of €9.0 billion. As of September 30, 2024, the company employed around 312,000 people worldwide on the basis of continuing operations.

NAICS: 33325
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 242,813
Subsidiaries: 13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rockwell-automation.jpeg
Rockwell Automation
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/siemens.jpeg
Siemens
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
Rockwell Automation
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Siemens
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Automation Machinery Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Rockwell Automation has 322.54% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Automation Machinery Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Siemens in 2025.

Incident History — Rockwell Automation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rockwell Automation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Siemens cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rockwell-automation.jpeg
Rockwell Automation
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Network-based, Unauthenticated access to WDB agent, Exploitation of debugging interface
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Deserialization of Untrusted Data
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Inadequate Input Sanitization
Motivation: Disruption of Industrial Processes, Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Data, Long-term Presence Within the Network
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/siemens.jpeg
Siemens
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2024
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Unlocked bootloader
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Rockwell Automation company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Siemens company.

In the current year, Rockwell Automation company has reported more cyber incidents than Siemens company.

Neither Siemens company nor Rockwell Automation company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Rockwell Automation company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Siemens company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Siemens company nor Rockwell Automation company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Both Rockwell Automation company and Siemens company have disclosed vulnerabilities.

Neither Rockwell Automation nor Siemens holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Rockwell Automation company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Siemens company.

Siemens company employs more people globally than Rockwell Automation company, reflecting its scale as a Automation Machinery Manufacturing.

Neither Rockwell Automation nor Siemens holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Rockwell Automation nor Siemens holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Rockwell Automation nor Siemens holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Rockwell Automation nor Siemens holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Rockwell Automation nor Siemens holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Rockwell Automation nor Siemens 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
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