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

Comparison Overview

SMA SolarSMA Solar
VS
Siemens GamesaSiemens Gamesa
SMA Solar

SMA Solar

Sonnenallee 1, Niestetal, Kassel, DE, 34266

Last Update: 02/05/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.sma.de/en
741/1000Moderate

Innovative and sustainable key technologies are prerequisites for renewable energy supply. More than 3,500 employees from 18 countries work to ensure that SMA is actively helping to promote the production and development of PV system technology worldwide. SMA is the on...

NAICS:33441
NAICS Definition:Semiconductor and Other Electronic Component Manufacturing
Employees:1,966
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2
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
SMA Solar

SMA Solar

-
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)

SMA Solar has 60.0% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Siemens Gamesa in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - SMA Solar (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SMA Solar 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...
SMA Solar

SMA Solar

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
IGNSMASUN1777703479
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
SMA3152431112825
Siemens Gamesa

Siemens Gamesa

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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