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

Comparison Overview

TupyTupy
VS
CelesticaCelestica
Tupy

Tupy

Rua Albano Schmidt 3400, Joinville, 89227-220, BR

Last Update: 07/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.tupy.com.br
784/1000Fair

Tupy is a Brazilian company specialized in developing and manufacturing highly-engineered structural cast iron components applied to complex metallurgical and geometrical components extensively used in capital goods that serve freight transport, construction industry, ...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:10,906
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Celestica

Celestica

5140 Yonge St, Toronto, M2N 6L7, CA

Last Update: 06/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.celestica.com
815/1000Good

Celestica is a technology leader dedicated to driving customer success and market advancements. With deep expertise in design, engineering, manufacturing, supply chain and platform solutions, Celestica enables critical data center infrastructure for AI, cloud, and hybri...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:15,374
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Tupy

Tupy

-
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
Celestica

Celestica

-
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 Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tupy in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Celestica in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Tupy (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tupy 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 - Celestica (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Celestica 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...
Tupy

Tupy

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Celestica

Celestica

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8