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

Comparison Overview

SharpSharp
VS
Samsung MobileSamsung Mobile
Sharp

Sharp

匠町1 堺市堺区, 大阪府 590-8522, JP

Last Update: 23/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://global.sharp
764/1000Fair

„ÄêCorporate Name„Äë Sharp Corporation „ÄêHead Office„Äë 1 Takumi-cho, Sakai-ku, Sakai City, Osaka 590-8522, Japan „ÄêManagement Representatives„Äë Masahiro Okitsu, President & Chief Executive Officer „ÄêBusiness Activities„Äë Mainly manufacturing and sales of teleco...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:10,001
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Samsung Mobile

Samsung Mobile

DongSuwon P.O.BOX 105, 416, Maetan-3dong, Gyeonggi-do, 443-742, KR

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
745/1000Moderate

Samsung Mobile is at the forefront of mobile intelligence, shaping the future with Galaxy AI. With the next evolution of Galaxy AI, we are making lives simpler–reducing stress, creating more time, and getting the help you need without even having to ask. In this era of...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:19,542
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Sharp

Sharp

-
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
Samsung Mobile

Samsung Mobile

-
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 Consumer Electronics Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Sharp in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Consumer Electronics Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Samsung Mobile in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Sharp (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Sharp 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 - Samsung Mobile (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Samsung Mobile 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...
Sharp

Sharp

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Samsung Mobile

Samsung Mobile

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
SAM1862118110825
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
SAM301050625
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
SAM5892158110825

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9