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

Comparison Overview

Waterloo BrewingWaterloo Brewing
VS
Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.
Waterloo Brewing

Waterloo Brewing

400 Bingemans Centre Drive, Kitchener, N2B 3X9, CA

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://waterloobrewing.com/
736/1000Moderate

Founded in 1984, Waterloo Brewing was the first craft brewery to start up in Ontario and is credited with pioneering the present-day craft brewing renaissance in Canada. Waterloo Brewing has complemented its Waterloo premium beers with the popular Laker brand. In 2011, ...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:89
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai, 400079, IN

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
790/1000Fair

Godrej is one of India’s most trusted brands serving over 1.1bn customers worldwide, every day. Godrej & Boyce, a Godrej group company, began it's journey in 1897 with the manufacture of high quality locks and continues with its outstanding engineering capabilities ac...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:19,182
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Waterloo Brewing

Waterloo Brewing

-
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
Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

-
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 Waterloo Brewing in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Waterloo Brewing (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Waterloo Brewing cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. 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...
Waterloo Brewing

Waterloo Brewing

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
WAT213271122
Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd.

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66720
SUMMARY

The GOOSE subscriber component improperly validates the UTC timestamp field in unauthenticated IEC 61850 GOOSE (EtherType 0x88B8) Layer-2 multicast messages. A specially crafted GOOSE frame containing an undersized timestamp field can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read during message processing, causing the process to crash and resulting in a denial-of-service condition.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66421
SUMMARY

OpenClaw Dashboard contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the administrator's browser session by injecting HTML markup into agent transcript messages processed through the sessions API. Attackers can craft a message containing inline event handler payloads such as an img tag with an onerror attribute within the 60-character rendering budget, which is stored in the session transcript and interpolated unsanitized into innerHTML on the default landing page, allowing theft of session tokens and unauthorized calls to authenticated administrative endpoints including agent instruction file modification.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/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
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66420
SUMMARY

MeshCentral 1.1.21 contains a cross-site WebSocket hijacking protection bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to hijack authenticated administrator sessions by exploiting an unconditional early return in the CheckWebServerOriginName() function within webserver.js when self-signed certificates are in use. Attackers can open cross-origin WebSocket connections to any of the twelve WebSocket endpoints, send crafted action commands to exfiltrate the server sessionKey used to sign session cookies, forge session tokens as arbitrary users, and gain full remote control of all managed devices governed by the MeshCentral instance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66369
SUMMARY

The GOOSE parser contains an off-by-one boundary-handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer-2 multicast frame on the process bus. When specific GOOSE message fields are processed, the parser advances its internal buffer position incorrectly, resulting in a heap out-of-bounds read. On affected platforms, this condition reliably terminates the subscriber process and causes a denial-of-service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66364
SUMMARY

The GOOSE payload parser contains a boundary handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer 2 multicast frame on the process bus. When processing specific payload fields, an attacker controlled inner element length may exceed its enclosing length, causing the parser to over read by one byte. This out-of-bounds read reliably terminates the subscriber process, resulting in a denial-of-service condition.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8