Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

PT SANY Indonesia MachineryPT SANY Indonesia Machinery
VS
Burns & McDonnellBurns & McDonnell
PT SANY Indonesia Machinery

PT SANY Indonesia Machinery

UoB Plaza, Unit 1, 42th Floor JI. M.H. Thamrin Kav. 8-9, Jakata Pusat 10230, Indonesia, Jakarta, 10230, ID

Last Update: 29/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.sanyglobal.com
831/1000Good

PT SANY Indonesia Machinery, is the overseas subsidiary of SANY Heavy Industry Co., Ltd, the biggest and best heavy equipment manufacturer in China. PT SANY Indonesia provides Sales and Service of SANY products in Indonesia. The authorized dealer of SANY in Indonesia is...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:811
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Burns & McDonnell

Burns & McDonnell

9400 Ward Pkwy, Kansas City, 64114, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.burnsmcd.com
783/1000Fair

At Burns & McDonnell, our engineers, construction professionals, architects, planners, technologists and scientists do more than plan, design and construct. With a mission unchanged since 1898 — make our clients successful — we partner with you on the toughest challenge...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:15,385
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
PT SANY Indonesia Machinery

PT SANY Indonesia Machinery

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Burns & McDonnell

Burns & McDonnell

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PT SANY Indonesia Machinery in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Burns & McDonnell in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - PT SANY Indonesia Machinery (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PT SANY Indonesia Machinery cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Burns & McDonnell (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Burns & McDonnell cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
PT SANY Indonesia Machinery

PT SANY Indonesia Machinery

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Burns & McDonnell

Burns & McDonnell

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery company and Burns & McDonnell company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery and Burns & McDonnell, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery and Burns & McDonnell, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - PT SANY Indonesia Machinery or Burns & McDonnell ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - PT SANY Indonesia Machinery or Burns & McDonnell ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery and Burns & McDonnell, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between PT SANY Indonesia Machinery and Burns & McDonnell, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2