Comparison Overview

Yokogawa Electric Corporation

VS

Flex

Yokogawa Electric Corporation

Not Available, Not Available, Not Available Not Available, IT
Last Update: 2025-12-17

Yokogawa Electric Corporation is an electrical/electronic manufacturing company based out of Not Available, Not Available, Not Available, Italy.

NAICS: 335
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 238
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Flex

12455 Research Blvd, Austin, Texas, 78759, US
Last Update: 2025-12-18
Between 750 and 799

We’re the manufacturing partner of choice that helps a diverse customer base design and build products that improve the world. We love to hear your thoughts, comments and ideas so feel free to like, share and comment away. Any question or opinion is good to go as long as it is respectful and falls within the scope of this page. Derogatory comments, spam and unsolicited selling are not welcome here and such posts will be removed.

NAICS: 335
NAICS Definition: Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component Manufacturing
Employees: 49,827
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/yokogawa-electric-corporation.jpeg
Yokogawa Electric Corporation
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/flexintl.jpeg
Flex
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Yokogawa Electric Corporation
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Flex
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

Yokogawa Electric Corporation has 17.65% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Flex in 2025.

Incident History — Yokogawa Electric Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Yokogawa Electric Corporation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Flex (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Flex cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/yokogawa-electric-corporation.jpeg
Yokogawa Electric Corporation
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Network Access
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/flexintl.jpeg
Flex
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Flex company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Yokogawa Electric Corporation company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Yokogawa Electric Corporation company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Flex company has not reported any.

In the current year, Yokogawa Electric Corporation company has reported more cyber incidents than Flex company.

Neither Flex company nor Yokogawa Electric Corporation company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Flex company nor Yokogawa Electric Corporation company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Flex company nor Yokogawa Electric Corporation company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Yokogawa Electric Corporation company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Flex company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Yokogawa Electric Corporation nor Flex holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Flex company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Yokogawa Electric Corporation company.

Flex company employs more people globally than Yokogawa Electric Corporation company, reflecting its scale as a Appliances, Electrical, and Electronics Manufacturing.

Neither Yokogawa Electric Corporation nor Flex holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Yokogawa Electric Corporation nor Flex holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Yokogawa Electric Corporation nor Flex holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Yokogawa Electric Corporation nor Flex holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Yokogawa Electric Corporation nor Flex holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Yokogawa Electric Corporation nor Flex holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

httparty is an API tool. In versions 0.23.2 and prior, httparty is vulnerable to SSRF. This issue can pose a risk of leaking API keys, and it can also allow third parties to issue requests to internal servers. This issue has been patched via commit 0529bcd.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.8
Severity: 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: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
Description

5ire is a cross-platform desktop artificial intelligence assistant and model context protocol client. In versions 0.15.2 and prior, an RCE vulnerability exists in useMarkdown.ts, where the markdown-it-mermaid plugin is initialized with securityLevel: 'loose'. This configuration explicitly permits the rendering of HTML tags within Mermaid diagram nodes. This issue has not been patched at time of publication.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

continuwuity is a Matrix homeserver written in Rust. Prior to version 0.5.0, this vulnerability allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to force the target server to cryptographically sign arbitrary membership events. The flaw exists because the server fails to validate the origin of a signing request, provided the event's state_key is a valid user ID belonging to the target server. This issue has been patched in version 0.5.0. A workaround for this issue involves blocking access to the PUT /_matrix/federation/v2/invite/{roomId}/{eventId} endpoint using the reverse proxy.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:L/SA:L/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
Description

LangChain is a framework for building LLM-powered applications. Prior to @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and prior to langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain JS's toJSON() method (and subsequently when string-ifying objects using JSON.stringify(). The method did not escape objects with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form data in kwargs. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

LangChain is a framework for building agents and LLM-powered applications. Prior to versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain's dumps() and dumpd() functions. The functions do not escape dictionaries with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form dictionaries. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N