Comparison Overview

Royal BAM Group

VS

STRABAG

Royal BAM Group

Runnenburg 9, Bunnik, undefined, 3981 AZ, NL
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799

🏗️ Building a Sustainable Tomorrow at BAM! As leaders in the construction industry, we are committed to pioneering sustainable practices that not only enhance our projects but also contribute to a better future for generations to come. Our strategy revolves around focusing to protect profitability, transforming to strengthen competitive advantage, and expanding for future growth. Join us in making possible by prioritising sustainability in everything we do. 🌍

NAICS: 23
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 15,131
Subsidiaries: 22
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

STRABAG

Ortenburger Strasse 27, Spittal/Drau, Kärnten, AT, 9800
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799

At STRABAG around 86,000 people working on progress at more than 2,400 locations worldwide. Uniqueness and individual strengths characterise both our projects and each of us as individuals. Whether its building construction, civil engineering, road construction, underground engineering, bridge building, tunnelling, construction material production, project development or building management – we are always one step ahead so that we can become the most innovative and sustainable construction technology company in Europe. Diversity, inclusion and equal opportunities are integral to this, who we are as a company and how we work. Together we work as partners to complete projects successfully and grow with new challenges. Together we achieve great things. Let’s progress!

NAICS: 23
NAICS Definition: Construction
Employees: 15,074
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/royal-bam-group.jpeg
Royal BAM Group
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/strabag.jpeg
STRABAG
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
Royal BAM Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
STRABAG
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Construction Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Royal BAM Group in 2025.

Incidents vs Construction Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for STRABAG in 2025.

Incident History — Royal BAM Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Royal BAM Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

STRABAG cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/royal-bam-group.jpeg
Royal BAM Group
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/strabag.jpeg
STRABAG
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

STRABAG company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Royal BAM Group company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, STRABAG company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Royal BAM Group company.

In the current year, STRABAG company and Royal BAM Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither STRABAG company nor Royal BAM Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither STRABAG company nor Royal BAM Group company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither STRABAG company nor Royal BAM Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Royal BAM Group company nor STRABAG company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Royal BAM Group nor STRABAG holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Royal BAM Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to STRABAG company.

Royal BAM Group company employs more people globally than STRABAG company, reflecting its scale as a Construction.

Neither Royal BAM Group nor STRABAG holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Royal BAM Group nor STRABAG holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Royal BAM Group nor STRABAG holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Royal BAM Group nor STRABAG holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Royal BAM Group nor STRABAG holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Royal BAM Group nor STRABAG holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

FreePBX Endpoint Manager is a module for managing telephony endpoints in FreePBX systems. Versions prior to 16.0.96 and 17.0.1 through 17.0.9 have a weak default password. By default, this is a 6 digit numeric value which can be brute forced. (This is the app_password parameter). Depending on local configuration, this password could be the extension, voicemail, user manager, DPMA or EPM phone admin password. This issue is fixed in versions 16.0.96 and 17.0.10.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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

Neuron is a PHP framework for creating and orchestrating AI Agents. In versions 2.8.11 and below, the MySQLWriteTool executes arbitrary SQL provided by the caller using PDO::prepare() + execute() without semantic restrictions. This is consistent with the name (“write tool”), but in an LLM/agent context it becomes a high-risk capability: prompt injection or indirect prompt manipulation can cause execution of destructive queries such as DROP TABLE, TRUNCATE, DELETE, ALTER, or privilege-related statements (subject to DB permissions). Deployments that expose an agent with MySQLWriteTool enabled to untrusted input and/or run the tool with a DB user that has broad privileges are impacted. This issue is fixed in version 2.8.12.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
Description

Neuron is a PHP framework for creating and orchestrating AI Agents. Versions 2.8.11 and below use MySQLSelectTool, which is vulnerable to Read-Only Bypass. MySQLSelectTool is intended to be a read-only SQL tool (e.g., for LLM agent querying, however, validation based on the first keyword (e.g., SELECT) and a forbidden-keyword list does not block file-writing constructs such as INTO OUTFILE / INTO DUMPFILE. As a result, an attacker who can influence the tool input (e.g., via prompt injection through a public agent endpoint) may write arbitrary files to the DB server if the MySQL/MariaDB account has the FILE privilege and server configuration permits writes to a useful location (e.g., a web-accessible directory). This issue is fixed in version 2.8.12.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

Okta Java Management SDK facilitates interactions with the Okta management API. In versions 11.0.0 through 20.0.0, race conditions may arise from concurrent requests using the ApiClient class. This could cause a status code or response header from one request’s response to influence another request’s response. This issue is fixed in version 20.0.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.4
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

The Auth0 Next.js SDK is a library for implementing user authentication in Next.js applications. When using versions 4.11.0 through 4.11.2 and 4.12.0, simultaneous requests on the same client may result in improper lookups in the TokenRequestCache for the request results. This issue is fixed in versions 4.11.2 and 4.12.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N