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

Comparison Overview

Schöck Bauteile AG (CH)Schöck Bauteile AG (CH)
VS
PCL ConstructionPCL Construction
Schöck Bauteile AG (CH)

Schöck Bauteile AG (CH)

Tellistrasse 90, Aarau, 5000, CH

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.schoeck.com
749/1000Moderate

Die Schöck Bauteile AG ist ein Unternehmen der weltweit tätigen Schöck Gruppe mit 14 internationalen Vertriebsstandorten in Europa und Nordamerika. Der Schwerpunkt liegt auf der Entwicklung und Herstellung von Produkten, die mit hohem bauphysikalischen Nutzen und besond...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:19
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
PCL Construction

PCL Construction

9915-56th Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, CA, T6E 5L7

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.pcl.com
771/1000Fair

PCL is a group of independent construction companies that carries out work across Canada, the United States, the Caribbean, and in Australia. These diverse operations in the civil infrastructure, heavy industrial, and buildings markets are supported by a strategic prese...

NAICS:23
NAICS Definition:Construction
Employees:12,124
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Schöck Bauteile AG (CH)

Schöck Bauteile AG (CH)

-
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
PCL Construction

PCL Construction

-
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 Schöck Bauteile AG (CH) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Construction Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PCL Construction in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Schöck Bauteile AG (CH) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Schöck Bauteile AG (CH) 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 - PCL Construction (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PCL Construction cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Schöck Bauteile AG (CH)

Schöck Bauteile AG (CH)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
PCL Construction

PCL Construction

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
PCL546072525

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-49416
SUMMARY

The CONS_HISTORY ioctl handler did not adequately validate the requested history size. A large value caused an integer overflow in the buffer size calculation, resulting in a heap allocation smaller than expected. Subsequent initialization of the buffer wrote beyond the end of the allocation. An unprivileged local user with access to a vt(4) device can trigger an out-of-bounds write in the kernel, potentially escalating privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49414
SUMMARY

The ELF image activator cleared per-process ASLR preference flags for setuid binaries after the code that computes the PIE base address, rather than before. As a result, a user-requested ASLR disable was still in effect at the point where the base address was chosen. An unprivileged local user can disable ASLR for a setuid PIE binary by calling procctl(2) before execve(2). This makes exploitation of any separate memory corruption vulnerability in that binary significantly easier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49417
SUMMARY

Second, the audio buffer backing a mapping could be freed when the device was closed even though the mapping remained valid. The freed memory could then be reused elsewhere while still accessible through the stale mapping. The /dev/dsp device nodes are world-accessible by default. On a system with an audio device, either issue allows an unprivileged local user to read and write kernel memory, which can be used to escalate privileges, potentially gaining full control of the affected system. At a minimum, an attacker can crash the kernel, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49413
SUMMARY

The Linuxulator determined whether a binary was set-user-ID or set-group-ID by checking the P_SUGID process flag. During execve(2), this flag is not yet set at the point where the auxiliary vector is constructed, so AT_SECURE was incorrectly set to zero for set-user-ID and set-group-ID executables. An unprivileged local user can inject a shared library via LD_PRELOAD into a set-user-ID or set-group-ID Linux binary, gaining the privileges of that binary.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49412
SUMMARY

The kernel handler for IPV6_MSFILTER dropped a serializing lock in order to copy the source-filter list from userspace, then reacquired the lock. During this window another thread could free the multicast filter structure, leaving the handler with a stale pointer to freed memory. An unprivileged local user can exploit this use-after-free to escalate privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA