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

Comparison Overview

TT-LineTT-Line
VS
J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.
TT-Line

TT-Line

Zum Hafenplatz 1, Lübeck-Travemünde, 23570, DE

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
752/1000Fair

TT-Line offers reliable, high quality and environmentally friendly transport solutions for more than 64 years. Our company has been operating direct ferry services between Germany and Sweden since 1962, which started with the route Travemünde - Trelleborg and was follow...

NAICS:484
NAICS Definition:Truck Transportation
Employees:556
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.

J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.

615 J.B Hunt Corporate Drive, Lowell, 72745, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.jbhunt.com
775/1000Fair

J.B. Hunt specializes in freight shipping for customers of all sizes. Our mission is to drive long-term value for our people, customers and shareholders while staying focused on our vision to create the most efficient transportation network in North America. Our foundat...

NAICS:484
NAICS Definition:Truck Transportation
Employees:22,134
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
TT-Line

TT-Line

-
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
J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.

J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.

-
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 Truck Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for TT-Line in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Truck Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - TT-Line (X = Date, Y = Severity)

TT-Line cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. 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...
TT-Line

TT-Line

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
TTL651092125
J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.

J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
JB-836072525

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16197
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. The affected element is the function handleMessageReceive of the file pkg/channels/feishu/feishu_64.go of the component Group Message Handler. Such manipulation leads to missing authorization. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16196
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. Impacted is the function isPrivateOrRestrictedIP of the file pkg/tools/integration/web.go of the component web_fetch. This manipulation causes server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. Patch name: 2efbe5d560e7ed9bc5209c203dc4aa6ecdbc7405. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16195
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. This issue affects the function dispatchIncoming of the file pkg/channels/wecom/wecom.go of the component Group Message Handler. The manipulation results in incorrect authorization. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-10130
SUMMARY

QueryWeaver contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to obtain valid session tokens for existing accounts by submitting a signup request with a known victim email address. The signup route unconditionally creates and links a new token to the matching Identity via a Cypher MERGE operation before checking whether the email belongs to an existing account, causing the server to return a valid authenticated session token for the victim's identity without requiring any prior credentials or user interaction.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-16194
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in zhayujie CowAgent up to 2.1.1. This affects the function WebFetch.execute of the file agent/tools/web_fetch/web_fetch.py. Executing a manipulation of the argument url can lead to server-side request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. Upgrading to version 2.1.2 is able to mitigate this issue. This patch is called ea47f3097eed4f8295c4cb3d76ecb97e0f43d632. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component. The vendor was contacted early, responded in a very professional manner and quickly released a fixed version of the affected product.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8