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

Comparison Overview

TDK-Lambda UKTDK-Lambda UK
VS
FlexFlex
TDK-Lambda UK

TDK-Lambda UK

Kingsley Avenue, Ilfracombe, Devon, EX34 8ES, GB

Last Update: 21/04/2026

View Profile
748/1000Moderate

TDK-Lambda UK is a unit of the TDK Corporation, a leading global electronics company. TDK-Lambda UK was established in 1959 as Coutant Electronics and is now Britain's largest designer and manufacturer of both standard and configurable AC-DC and DC-DC power supplies. TD...

NAICS:335
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:130
Subsidiaries:17
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Flex

Flex

12455 Research Blvd, Austin, Texas, US, 78759

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://flex.com/
799/1000Fair

Flex (Reg. No. 199002645H) is the global manufacturing partner of choice that helps leading brands design, build, and manage products that improve the world. For more information, visit flex.com. We love to hear your thoughts, comments and ideas so feel free to like, s...

NAICS:335
NAICS Definition:Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing
Employees:54,781
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
TDK-Lambda UK

TDK-Lambda UK

-
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
Flex

Flex

-
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 Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for TDK-Lambda UK in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Flex in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - TDK-Lambda UK (X = Date, Y = Severity)

TDK-Lambda UK 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 - Flex (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Flex 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...
TDK-Lambda UK

TDK-Lambda UK

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Flex

Flex

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9