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

Comparison Overview

Scania OskarshamnScania Oskarshamn
VS
Visteon CorporationVisteon Corporation
Scania Oskarshamn

Scania Oskarshamn

Sandåsavägen 7, Oskarshamn, 572 36, SE

Last Update: 13/04/2026

View Profile
747/1000Moderate

Scania Oskarshamn is Kalmar County's largest private employer with 3,000 employees and is responsible for the production of Scania's European production of cabs. We are a modern industry with high technology and automation. Scania's aim is to lead the shift towards a su...

NAICS:3361
NAICS Definition:Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees:202
Subsidiaries:65
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Visteon Corporation

Visteon Corporation

1 Village Center Dr., Van Buren Township, MI, US, 48111

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.visteon.com
756/1000Fair

Visteon is advancing mobility through innovative technology solutions that enable a software-defined and electric future. With next-generation digital cockpit and electrification products, Visteon leverages the strength and agility of its global network with a local foo...

NAICS:3361
NAICS Definition:Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees:10,620
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Scania Oskarshamn

Scania Oskarshamn

-
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
Visteon Corporation

Visteon Corporation

-
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 Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Scania Oskarshamn in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Visteon Corporation in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Scania Oskarshamn (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Scania Oskarshamn cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Visteon Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Visteon Corporation 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...
Scania Oskarshamn

Scania Oskarshamn

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Visteon Corporation

Visteon Corporation

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1