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

Comparison Overview

Škoda AutoŠkoda Auto
VS
HutchinsonHutchinson
Škoda Auto

Škoda Auto

Václava Klementa 869, Mladá Boleslav, 293 60, CZ

Last Update: 12/05/2026

View Profile
Between 550 and 599
http://www.skoda-career.com
576/1000Very Poor

Since 1895, we have been creating progressive contemporary vehicles. This approach was first applied to bicycles, followed by motorcycles and finally cars. For more than 125 years, we have combined design, the latest technology, functionality and innovation in everythin...

NAICS:3361
NAICS Definition:Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees:9,616
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2
Hutchinson

Hutchinson

2, Rue de Balzac, Paris, 75008, FR

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.hutchinson.com
773/1000Fair

Hutchinson designs and produces customized materials and connected solutions to respond to the needs of its global customers, on land, in the air and at sea. A global leader in vibration control, fluid management and sealing system technologies, our Group stands out wit...

NAICS:3361
NAICS Definition:Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees:13,231
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Škoda Auto

Škoda Auto

-
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
Hutchinson

Hutchinson

-
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 Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

Škoda Auto has 57.98% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hutchinson in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Škoda Auto (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Škoda Auto cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Hutchinson 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...
Škoda Auto

Škoda Auto

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
SKO1778503186
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
SEASKOBENPORVOLAUTVOL1770202467
🔒 Incident : Breach
SKOJLRREN1778610419
Hutchinson

Hutchinson

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8