Comparison Overview

Ross Engineering

VS

Machine Covers Ltd

Ross Engineering

620 W California Avenue, Oklahoma City, OK, US, 73102
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Ross Engineering serves the oil and gas, industrial, commercial, and public sectors. Ross Engineering is affiliated with The Ross Group, which has provided construction services since 1979. Ross Engineering specializes in Midstream Oil & Gas, Industrial Facilities, Medical Facilities, Laboratories, Central Plants, Data Centers, Energy Production, State and Federal Government, Commercial Buildings, and Manufacturing. Ross Engineering provides services to the nations largest oil & gas companies, including Plains All-American Pipeline, Devon Energy, and Continental Resources. Projects involve oil terminal facilities, compressor stations, gathering pipeline systems, truck off-load, and central tank batteries. Ross Engineering utilizes CADWorx for 3D piping; SynerGee for modeling of water, oil, and gas pipelines; and Promax for process modeling.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 10
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Machine Covers Ltd

Stancombe Works, Stroud Road , Bisley , GL6 7NQ, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Our extensive product range includes concertina covers, industrial roller blinds, static covers and flexible connections, steel telescopic slideway covers and robot covers. We also offer health and safety consultancy and engineering services, including safety audits and risk assessments, as well as a full range of machine safety guarding solutions. Most types of safety guarding and electrical interlocks are stock items. With experience working across a wide range of industries, we are able to fully understand your individual requirements. Our personal and flexible approach enables us to achieve your exact objectives.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 5
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/ross-engineering.jpeg
Ross Engineering
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/machine-covers.jpeg
Machine Covers Ltd
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
Ross Engineering
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Machine Covers Ltd
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ross Engineering in 2025.

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Machine Covers Ltd in 2025.

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

Ross Engineering cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Machine Covers Ltd (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Machine Covers Ltd cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ross-engineering.jpeg
Ross Engineering
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/machine-covers.jpeg
Machine Covers Ltd
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Machine Covers Ltd company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ross Engineering company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Machine Covers Ltd company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Ross Engineering company.

In the current year, Machine Covers Ltd company and Ross Engineering company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Machine Covers Ltd company nor Ross Engineering company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Machine Covers Ltd company nor Ross Engineering company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Machine Covers Ltd company nor Ross Engineering company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Ross Engineering company nor Machine Covers Ltd company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Ross Engineering nor Machine Covers Ltd holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Ross Engineering company nor Machine Covers Ltd company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Ross Engineering company employs more people globally than Machine Covers Ltd company, reflecting its scale as a Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering.

Neither Ross Engineering nor Machine Covers Ltd holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ross Engineering nor Machine Covers Ltd holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ross Engineering nor Machine Covers Ltd holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ross Engineering nor Machine Covers Ltd holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ross Engineering nor Machine Covers Ltd holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ross Engineering nor Machine Covers Ltd 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