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

Comparison Overview

Schneider Electric Solar & StorageSchneider Electric Solar & Storage
VS
Siemens GamesaSiemens Gamesa
Schneider Electric Solar & Storage

Schneider Electric Solar & Storage

#100 – 13091 Vanier Place, Richmond, V6V 2J1 , CA

Last Update: 21/03/2026

View Profile

Schneider’s purpose is to create Impact by empowering all to make the most of our energy and resources, bridging progress and sustainability for all. At Schneider, we call this Life Is On. Our mission is to be the trusted partner in Sustainability and Efficiency. We are...

NAICS:33441
NAICS Definition:Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Siemens Gamesa

Siemens Gamesa

Parque Tecnológico de Bizkaia, edificio 222, Zamudio, 48170, ES

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
798/1000Fair

Siemens Gamesa is a global technology leader in the renewable energy industry - specifically in the development, manufacturing, installation and maintenance of wind turbines. Being a pioneer in renewables since the 1980s, we put our scale and entrepreneurial culture to ...

NAICS:33441
NAICS Definition:Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Employees:20,344
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Schneider Electric Solar & Storage

Schneider Electric Solar & Storage

-
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
Siemens Gamesa

Siemens Gamesa

-
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 Renewable Energy Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Schneider Electric Solar & Storage in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Renewable Energy Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Siemens Gamesa in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Schneider Electric Solar & Storage (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Schneider Electric Solar & Storage cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Siemens Gamesa (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Siemens Gamesa 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...
Schneider Electric Solar & Storage

Schneider Electric Solar & Storage

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Siemens Gamesa

Siemens Gamesa

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-19374
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in adafap api-mcp up to 92b9a5d04acfec165c7d4ef852496593aa87be06. This affects the function customAxios of the file app/api/proxy/route.ts of the component Proxy API Endpoint. The manipulation of the argument url leads to server-side request forgery. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. This product adopts a rolling release strategy to maintain continuous delivery. Therefore, version details for affected or updated releases cannot be specified. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-09
UPDATED
Date2026-08-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-19373
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in PhialsBasement KoboldCPP-MCP-Server 1.0.0. Affected by this issue is the function makeRequest of the file src/index.ts of the component BaseConfigSchema. Executing a manipulation of the argument apiUrl can lead to server-side request forgery. It is possible to launch the attack on the local host. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-09
UPDATED
Date2026-08-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-19372
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in Handwriting-OCR handwriting-ocr-mcp-server 0.1.0. Affected by this vulnerability is the function fs.readFileSync of the file src/index.ts of the component upload_document. Performing a manipulation of the argument File results in path traversal. Attacking locally is a requirement. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-09
UPDATED
Date2026-08-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-19371
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in Nikolaibibo claude-comfyui-mcp 1.0.0. Affected is the function copyFileSync of the file src/tools/utils.ts of the component comfy_upload_image. Such manipulation of the argument image_path leads to path traversal. An attack has to be approached locally. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-09
UPDATED
Date2026-08-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 1.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-12372
SUMMARY

A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in nltk/nltk versions 3.9.4 and the current develop branch. The `nltk.pathsec.validate_network_url()` function, intended to prevent SSRF by rejecting internal network addresses, fails to reject IPs in the RFC 6598 shared address space (`100.64.0.0/10`). This occurs because Python's `ipaddress` module does not classify such addresses as `is_private` or `is_global`, and the current guard only checks `is_private` and a few explicit categories. An attacker who can influence a URL passed to NLTK's network-loading helpers can exploit this vulnerability to make a strict-mode application send requests to shared-address-space hosts, potentially exposing non-public infrastructure reachable from the application host. The impact is limited to SSRF-style confidentiality exposure, with no code execution claimed.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-09
UPDATED
Date2026-08-09
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2