Comparison Overview

SCIS AIR SECURITY

VS

Delta Air Lines

SCIS AIR SECURITY

1521 N Cooper St., Arlington, TX, 76011, US
Last Update: 2025-03-05 (UTC)
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.scisairsecurity.com

SCIS was founded in 2001 after the tragic events of September 11th to provide security within the aviation industry. We quickly established ourselves as the leading provider of catering and aircraft security services across the country. With SIDA-badged employees in 39 airports, SCIS is recognized as the gold standard in catering security. Leveraging our footprint and processes, we expanded our portfolio to include mobility services. Our mobility services consist of equipment Lifecycle Management (LCM), kitting, provisioning, deployment, maintenance, and support. We also use our US footprint to provide logistical device management for Point of Sale (POS) devices and In-flight Entertainment (IFE) equipment. In 2020 COVID-19 had a significant impact on the aviation industry. In an effort to support the recovery, SCIS partnered with SteriFlight to provide UVC sanitization solutions within the aviation industry. UVC is proven to be highly effective at killing viruses, bacteria, and fungi, and has been used in hospitals and laboratories for over 20 years to sterilize rooms and equipment. We are proud to bring the same UVC technology to the aviation industry.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 298
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Delta Air Lines

1030 Delta Boulevard, None, Atlanta, Georgia, US, 30320-6001
Last Update: 2025-08-09 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799
http://www.delta.com

Delta Air Lines (NYSE: DAL) is the U.S. global airline leader in safety, innovation, reliability and customer experience. Powered by our employees around the world, Delta has for a decade led the airline industry in operational excellence while maintaining our reputation for award-winning customer service. With our mission of connecting the people and cultures of the globe, Delta strives to foster understanding across a diverse world and serve as a force for social good.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 78,092
Subsidiaries: 5
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/scis-air-security.jpeg
SCIS AIR SECURITY
—
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/delta-air-lines.jpeg
Delta Air Lines
—
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
SCIS AIR SECURITY
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Delta Air Lines
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for SCIS AIR SECURITY in 2025.

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

Delta Air Lines has 108.33% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — SCIS AIR SECURITY (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SCIS AIR SECURITY cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Delta Air Lines (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Delta Air Lines cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/scis-air-security.jpeg
SCIS AIR SECURITY
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/delta-air-lines.jpeg
Delta Air Lines
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2017
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Delta Air Lines company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to SCIS AIR SECURITY company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Delta Air Lines company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas SCIS AIR SECURITY company has not reported any.

In the current year, Delta Air Lines company has reported more cyber incidents than SCIS AIR SECURITY company.

Neither Delta Air Lines company nor SCIS AIR SECURITY company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Delta Air Lines company has disclosed at least one data breach, while SCIS AIR SECURITY company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Delta Air Lines company nor SCIS AIR SECURITY company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither SCIS AIR SECURITY company nor Delta Air Lines company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither SCIS AIR SECURITY nor Delta Air Lines holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Delta Air Lines company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to SCIS AIR SECURITY company.

Delta Air Lines company employs more people globally than SCIS AIR SECURITY company, reflecting its scale as a Airlines and Aviation.

Neither SCIS AIR SECURITY nor Delta Air Lines holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither SCIS AIR SECURITY nor Delta Air Lines holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither SCIS AIR SECURITY nor Delta Air Lines holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither SCIS AIR SECURITY nor Delta Air Lines holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither SCIS AIR SECURITY nor Delta Air Lines holds HIPAA certification.

Neither SCIS AIR SECURITY nor Delta Air Lines holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Deck Mate 1 executes firmware directly from an external EEPROM without verifying authenticity or integrity. An attacker with physical access can replace or reflash the EEPROM to run arbitrary code that persists across reboots. Because this design predates modern secure-boot or signed-update mechanisms, affected systems should be physically protected or retired from service. The vendor has not indicated that firmware updates are available for this legacy model.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
References
Description

Deck Mate 2 lacks a verified secure-boot chain and runtime integrity validation for its controller and display modules. Without cryptographic boot verification, an attacker with physical access can modify or replace the bootloader, kernel, or filesystem and gain persistent code execution on reboot. This weakness allows long-term firmware tampering that survives power cycles. The vendor indicates that more recent firmware updates strengthen update-chain integrity and disable physical update ports to mitigate related attack avenues.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
References
Description

Deck Mate 2's firmware update mechanism accepts packages without cryptographic signature verification, encrypts them with a single hard-coded AES key shared across devices, and uses a truncated HMAC for integrity validation. Attackers with access to the update interface - typically via the unit's USB update port - can craft or modify firmware packages to execute arbitrary code as root, allowing persistent compromise of the device's integrity and deck randomization process. Physical or on-premises access remains the most likely attack path, though network-exposed or telemetry-enabled deployments could theoretically allow remote exploitation if misconfigured. The vendor confirmed that firmware updates have been issued to correct these update-chain weaknesses and that USB update access has been disabled on affected units.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
References
Description

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS bc-fips on All (API modules), Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java LTS bcprov-lts8on on All (API modules) allows Excessive Allocation. This vulnerability is associated with program files core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCMSIV.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA224NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA3NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHAKENativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA512NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA384NativeDigest.Java. This issue affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS: from 2.1.0 through 2.1.1; Bouncy Castle for Java LTS: from 2.73.0 through 2.73.7.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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:P/AU:N/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:Amber
References
Description

Wasmtime is a runtime for WebAssembly. In versions from 38.0.0 to before 38.0.3, the implementation of component-model related host-to-wasm trampolines in Wasmtime contained a bug where it's possible to carefully craft a component, which when called in a specific way, would crash the host with a segfault or assert failure. Wasmtime 38.0.3 has been released and is patched to fix this issue. There are no workarounds.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/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
References