Comparison Overview

Swift Transportation

VS

SBB CFF FFS

Swift Transportation

2200 S. 75th Ave, Phoenix, 85043, US
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

Swift Transportation is the largest full-truckload motor carrier in North America. Based in Phoenix, Arizona, the Swift terminal network includes over thirty full-service facilities in the United States and Mexico. Swift provides a full line of service solutions, including linehaul, flatbed, intermodal, refrigerated, dedicated and logistics management. Swift also offers careers in operations, finance, account management, shop mechanics, human resources, payroll, and many more. Swift offers more than just a career - Swift is family. Want to join our team? https://www.swifttrans.com/careers Want to be a Driver? Apply Now! driveswift.com

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 10,631
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

SBB CFF FFS

Hilfikerstrasse 1, Bern, undefined, 3000, CH
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

We shape the mobility of the future – simple, personal, connected. SBB’s comprehensive service contract allows us to offer a wide range of exciting careers in all areas of business. Thanks to this variety, many different career paths are possible, which we support through education and training opportunities as well as targeted further development and promotion. Dedicated and active employees are the key to our success, which is why we offer modern employment conditions and promote modern working practices. Join SBB and help us keep Switzerland on the move. For more information about SBB and our exciting range of job opportunities, please visit http://www.sbb.ch/en/group/jobs-careers/working-for-sbb.html and www.sbb.ch/jobs. We look forward to meeting you!

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 16,905
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/swift-transportation.jpeg
Swift Transportation
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/sbb.jpeg
SBB CFF FFS
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Swift Transportation
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
SBB CFF FFS
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Transportation/Trucking/Railroad Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Swift Transportation in 2025.

Incidents vs Transportation/Trucking/Railroad Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for SBB CFF FFS in 2025.

Incident History — Swift Transportation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Swift Transportation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — SBB CFF FFS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SBB CFF FFS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/swift-transportation.jpeg
Swift Transportation
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/sbb.jpeg
SBB CFF FFS
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

SBB CFF FFS company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Swift Transportation company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, SBB CFF FFS company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Swift Transportation company.

In the current year, SBB CFF FFS company and Swift Transportation company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither SBB CFF FFS company nor Swift Transportation company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither SBB CFF FFS company nor Swift Transportation company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither SBB CFF FFS company nor Swift Transportation company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Swift Transportation company nor SBB CFF FFS company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Swift Transportation nor SBB CFF FFS holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

SBB CFF FFS company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Swift Transportation company.

SBB CFF FFS company employs more people globally than Swift Transportation company, reflecting its scale as a Transportation/Trucking/Railroad.

Neither Swift Transportation nor SBB CFF FFS holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Swift Transportation nor SBB CFF FFS holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Swift Transportation nor SBB CFF FFS holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Swift Transportation nor SBB CFF FFS holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Swift Transportation nor SBB CFF FFS holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Swift Transportation nor SBB CFF FFS holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H