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

Comparison Overview

Stoelzle Glass GroupStoelzle Glass Group
VS
Graphic Packaging InternationalGraphic Packaging International
Stoelzle Glass Group

Stoelzle Glass Group

Fabrikstraße 11, Köflach, Stmk., A-8580, AT

Last Update: 23/12/2025

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.stoelzle.com
745/1000Moderate

We love glass The Stoelzle Glass Group is a family-run company with six European and one US production plants. The Group has been producing high-quality glass packaging for the spirits, pharmaceutical, perfumery & cosmetics, food & beverage sectors for over 200 years. ...

NAICS:326
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:573
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Graphic Packaging International

Graphic Packaging International

1500 Riveredge Parkway, Atlanta, Georgia, US, 30328

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.graphicpkg.com
770/1000Fair

Graphic Packaging Holding Company (NYSE: GPK), headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, designs and produces consumer packaging, made primarily from renewable or recycled materials. An industry leader in innovation, the Company is committed to reducing the environmental footp...

NAICS:326112
NAICS Definition:Plastics Packaging Film and Sheet (including Laminated) Manufacturing
Employees:11,524
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Stoelzle Glass Group

Stoelzle Glass Group

-
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
Graphic Packaging International

Graphic Packaging International

-
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 Packaging and Containers Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Stoelzle Glass Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Packaging and Containers Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Graphic Packaging International in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Stoelzle Glass Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Stoelzle Glass Group 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 - Graphic Packaging International (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Graphic Packaging International cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Stoelzle Glass Group

Stoelzle Glass Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Graphic Packaging International

Graphic Packaging International

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
GRA406072625

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2