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

Comparison Overview

SITAEL-Hellas S.LtdSITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd
VS
SafranSafran
SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd

SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd

4, Dion. Solomou, Veria, 59100, GR

Last Update: 07/03/2026

View Profile
747/1000Moderate

SITAEL HELLAS is able to cover all the processes needed for the Design and Test of Electronic Equipment and sub-systems compliant with high reliability standards. The company has been founded in 2013, carrying out activities especially in the in-space propulsion fiel...

NAICS:3364
NAICS Definition:Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Safran

Safran

2, Boulevard du général Martial Valin, Paris, 75015, FR

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.safran-group.com/
813/1000Good

Safran is an international high-technology group, operating in the aviation (propulsion, equipment and interiors), defense and space markets. Its core purpose is to contribute to a safer, more sustainable world, where air transport is more environmentally friendly, comf...

NAICS:3364
NAICS Definition:Aerospace Product and Parts Manufacturing
Employees:73,347
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd

SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd

-
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
Safran

Safran

-
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 Aviation and Aerospace Component Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Aviation and Aerospace Component Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Safran in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd 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 - Safran (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Safran 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...
SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd

SITAEL-Hellas S.Ltd

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Safran

Safran

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
SAF04481023

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-56078
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains a path traversal vulnerability in MultiAgentMonitor that fails to sanitize agent IDs when building file paths. Attackers can include traversal sequences like ../ in agent IDs to read, write, or overwrite arbitrary files, enabling sensitive disclosure, denial of service, or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56077
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MultiAgentLedger component that allows attackers to access sensitive data by registering agents with duplicate IDs. Attackers can exploit the lack of agent ID uniqueness enforcement to share ledger instances and expose system prompts and conversation history between agents.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56076
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.128 contains a cross-origin agent execution vulnerability in the AGUI endpoint that allows remote attackers to trigger arbitrary agent execution. The POST /agui endpoint lacks authentication and hardcodes Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * headers, combined with Starlette's Content-Type-agnostic JSON parsing, enabling attackers to bypass CORS preflight checks via simple requests and exfiltrate sensitive agent responses including tool execution results and environment data.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56075
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 4.5.128 contains an arbitrary shell command execution vulnerability where the UI modules hardcode approval_mode to auto, overriding administrator configuration from PRAISON_APPROVAL_MODE environment variable. Authenticated attackers can instruct the LLM agent to execute arbitrary shell commands via subprocess.run with shell=True, bypassing the manual approval gate and insufficient command sanitization blocklists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56074
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:N/VA:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8