Comparison Overview

Saab

VS

General Atomics

Saab

Olof Palmes gata 17, Stockholm, SE
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799

As a leading defence and security company, we offer solutions that range from the depths of the oceans to high in the sky, on land and in cyberspace, to keep people and society safe. Empowered by our 22,000 talented people, we constantly push the boundaries of technology to create a safer, more sustainable and more equitable world. We design, manufacture and maintain advanced systems in aeronautics, weapons, command and control, sensors and underwater systems. We are headquartered in Sweden and have major operations all over the world and are part of the domestic defence capability of several nations.

NAICS: 336414
NAICS Definition: Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 19,309
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

General Atomics

3550 General Atomics Ct, San Diego, CA, US, 92121
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 750 and 799

The freedom to explore. The promise to deliver. General Atomics, based in San Diego, CA, develops advanced technology solutions for government and commercial applications. Privately owned and vertically integrated, we have the freedom to invest in the most innovative technologies, and the resources to deliver them as products for customers around the world. Predator® unmanned aerial vehicles, TRIGA® research reactors, aircraft carrier launch and recovery systems, MagLev transport and fusion energy are some of our most innovative programs.

NAICS: 336414
NAICS Definition: Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 10,689
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/saab.jpeg
Saab
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/general-atomics.jpeg
General Atomics
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
Saab
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
General Atomics
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Saab in 2025.

Incidents vs Defense and Space Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for General Atomics in 2025.

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

Saab cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — General Atomics (X = Date, Y = Severity)

General Atomics cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/saab.jpeg
Saab
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/general-atomics.jpeg
General Atomics
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Saab company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to General Atomics company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, General Atomics company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Saab company.

In the current year, General Atomics company and Saab company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither General Atomics company nor Saab company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither General Atomics company nor Saab company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither General Atomics company nor Saab company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Saab company nor General Atomics company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Saab nor General Atomics holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

General Atomics company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Saab company.

Saab company employs more people globally than General Atomics company, reflecting its scale as a Defense and Space Manufacturing.

Neither Saab nor General Atomics holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Saab nor General Atomics holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Saab nor General Atomics holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Saab nor General Atomics holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Saab nor General Atomics holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Saab nor General Atomics holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N