Comparison Overview

Tesla

VS

Royal Enfield

Tesla

13101 Harold Green Rd, Austin, Texas, US, 78725
Last Update: 2025-12-11
View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.tesla.com/careers

Tesla is accelerating the world’s transition to sustainable abundance. To achieve our mission, we're building a world powered by solar, enabled by battery storage and transported by electric vehicles. We’re committed to hiring and developing top talent from around the world for any given discipline. Headquartered in Texas, we operate six huge, vertically integrated factories across three continents. With over 100,000 employees, our teams take a first-principles approach to designing, building, selling and servicing our products in-house. Our world-class teams operate with a non-conventional philosophy of inter-disciplinary collaboration. Each member of the team is expected to challenge and to be challenged, to create, and to innovate. We’re tackling the world’s most difficult and important problems—and we wouldn’t succeed without our shared passion for making the world a better place.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 72,957
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
5
View Profile

Royal Enfield

Eicher Motors, #96, Sector 32,, Gurgaon, Haryana -, 122001, IN
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799
https://www.royalenfield.com/

The oldest motorcycle brand in continuous production, Royal Enfield made its first motorcycle in 1901. A division of Eicher Motors Limited, Royal Enfield has created the mid-sized motorcycle segment in India with its unique and distinctive modern classic bikes. Royal Enfield operates in 60+ countries across the world with more than 3000 retail touch points globally, 5 CKD units (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Nepal, & Thailand), 3 state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities based out of Chennai, India and two technical centers - in India and in the UK. Watch Royal Enfield's incredible journey here - https://youtu.be/UvR57lwJptk

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 17,284
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tesla-motors.jpeg
Tesla
—
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/royal-enfield.jpeg
Royal Enfield
—
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
Tesla
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Royal Enfield
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Tesla has 66.67% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Royal Enfield in 2025.

Incident History — Tesla (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tesla cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Royal Enfield (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Royal Enfield cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tesla-motors.jpeg
Tesla
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2024
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Repurposing of Vehicles
Motivation: Military Use in Conflict
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 08/2023
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/royal-enfield.jpeg
Royal Enfield
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Tesla company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Royal Enfield company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Tesla company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Royal Enfield company has not reported any.

In the current year, Tesla company has reported more cyber incidents than Royal Enfield company.

Tesla company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Royal Enfield company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Tesla company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Royal Enfield company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Tesla company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Royal Enfield company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Tesla company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Royal Enfield company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Tesla nor Royal Enfield holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Tesla company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Royal Enfield company.

Tesla company employs more people globally than Royal Enfield company, reflecting its scale as a Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.

Neither Tesla nor Royal Enfield holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Tesla nor Royal Enfield holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Tesla nor Royal Enfield holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Tesla nor Royal Enfield holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Tesla nor Royal Enfield holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Tesla nor Royal Enfield holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/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
References
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References