Comparison Overview

Shell

VS

Complexul Energetic Oltenia

Shell

York Road, London, England, SE1 7NA, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 800 and 849

Shell is a global group of energy and petrochemical companies, employing 103,000 people and with operations in more than 70 countries. We serve more than 1 million commercial and industrial customers, and around 33 million customers daily at more than 47,000 Shell-branded retail service stations. Our purpose is to power progress together by providing more and cleaner energy solutions. #PoweringProgress

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition: Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees: 154,123
Subsidiaries: 11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Complexul Energetic Oltenia

A.I. Cuza Street, no. 5 Targu-Jiu, Gorj 210006, RO
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 700 and 749

CE Oltenia is the sole lignite producer in Romania and one of the major players in the energy services sector in Romania, set-up on 31 May 2012 following a decision of the Romanian Government for the reorganization of the energy sector through a merger between a national lignite company (Societatea Nationala a Lignitului Oltenia) and three energy producing companies (Complexul Energetic Rovinari, Complexul Energetic Turceni and Complexul Energetic Craiova). CE Oltenia has an installed production capacity of 3900 MWh and the sales of electricity are made on the wholesale energy market – bilateral agreements market, next day market, balance market, technological system services market, en detail market and green certificates market. The Company also produces thermal energy – mainly for the city of Craiova and sales coal to third parties, mainly electricity producers. The main raw material used for the production of electricity is lignite extracted from Oltenia basin.

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 10,001
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/shell.jpeg
Shell
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/complexul-energetic-oltenia.jpeg
Complexul Energetic Oltenia
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
Shell
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Complexul Energetic Oltenia
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Shell in 2025.

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Complexul Energetic Oltenia in 2025.

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

Shell cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Complexul Energetic Oltenia (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Complexul Energetic Oltenia cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/shell.jpeg
Shell
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/complexul-energetic-oltenia.jpeg
Complexul Energetic Oltenia
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Shell company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Complexul Energetic Oltenia company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Complexul Energetic Oltenia company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Shell company.

In the current year, Complexul Energetic Oltenia company and Shell company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Complexul Energetic Oltenia company nor Shell company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Complexul Energetic Oltenia company nor Shell company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Complexul Energetic Oltenia company nor Shell company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Shell company nor Complexul Energetic Oltenia company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Shell nor Complexul Energetic Oltenia holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Shell company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Complexul Energetic Oltenia company.

Shell company employs more people globally than Complexul Energetic Oltenia company, reflecting its scale as a Oil and Gas.

Neither Shell nor Complexul Energetic Oltenia holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Shell nor Complexul Energetic Oltenia holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Shell nor Complexul Energetic Oltenia holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Shell nor Complexul Energetic Oltenia holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Shell nor Complexul Energetic Oltenia holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Shell nor Complexul Energetic Oltenia holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

FreePBX Endpoint Manager is a module for managing telephony endpoints in FreePBX systems. Versions prior to 16.0.96 and 17.0.1 through 17.0.9 have a weak default password. By default, this is a 6 digit numeric value which can be brute forced. (This is the app_password parameter). Depending on local configuration, this password could be the extension, voicemail, user manager, DPMA or EPM phone admin password. This issue is fixed in versions 16.0.96 and 17.0.10.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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
Description

Neuron is a PHP framework for creating and orchestrating AI Agents. In versions 2.8.11 and below, the MySQLWriteTool executes arbitrary SQL provided by the caller using PDO::prepare() + execute() without semantic restrictions. This is consistent with the name (“write tool”), but in an LLM/agent context it becomes a high-risk capability: prompt injection or indirect prompt manipulation can cause execution of destructive queries such as DROP TABLE, TRUNCATE, DELETE, ALTER, or privilege-related statements (subject to DB permissions). Deployments that expose an agent with MySQLWriteTool enabled to untrusted input and/or run the tool with a DB user that has broad privileges are impacted. This issue is fixed in version 2.8.12.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
Description

Neuron is a PHP framework for creating and orchestrating AI Agents. Versions 2.8.11 and below use MySQLSelectTool, which is vulnerable to Read-Only Bypass. MySQLSelectTool is intended to be a read-only SQL tool (e.g., for LLM agent querying, however, validation based on the first keyword (e.g., SELECT) and a forbidden-keyword list does not block file-writing constructs such as INTO OUTFILE / INTO DUMPFILE. As a result, an attacker who can influence the tool input (e.g., via prompt injection through a public agent endpoint) may write arbitrary files to the DB server if the MySQL/MariaDB account has the FILE privilege and server configuration permits writes to a useful location (e.g., a web-accessible directory). This issue is fixed in version 2.8.12.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

Okta Java Management SDK facilitates interactions with the Okta management API. In versions 11.0.0 through 20.0.0, race conditions may arise from concurrent requests using the ApiClient class. This could cause a status code or response header from one request’s response to influence another request’s response. This issue is fixed in version 20.0.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.4
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

The Auth0 Next.js SDK is a library for implementing user authentication in Next.js applications. When using versions 4.11.0 through 4.11.2 and 4.12.0, simultaneous requests on the same client may result in improper lookups in the TokenRequestCache for the request results. This issue is fixed in versions 4.11.2 and 4.12.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N