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
SonocoSonoco
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
Sonoco

Sonoco

1 North Second Street, Hartsville, 29550, US

Last Update: 14/11/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.sonoco.com
764/1000Fair

Founded in 1899, Sonoco (NYSE: SON) is a global leader in value-added, sustainable metal and paper consumer and industrial packaging. The Company had net sales of $7.5 billion from continuing operations in 2025 and has approximately 22,000 employees working in 265 opera...

NAICS:326112
NAICS Definition:Plastics Packaging Film and Sheet (including Laminated) Manufacturing
Employees:10,866
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

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
Sonoco

Sonoco

-
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 Sonoco 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 - Sonoco (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Sonoco 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...
Stoelzle Glass Group

Stoelzle Glass Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Sonoco

Sonoco

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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