Comparison Overview

Ford Motor Company

VS

General Motors

Ford Motor Company

None, None, Dearborn, Michigan, US, None
Last Update: 2025-12-09

We don't just make history -- we make the future. Ford put the world on wheels over a century ago, and our teams are re-inventing icons and creating groundbreaking connected and electric vehicles for the next century. We believe in serving our customers, our communities, and the world. If you do, too, come move the world and make the future with us. Ford is a global company with shared ideals and a deep sense of family. From our earliest days as a pioneer of modern transportation, we have sought to make the world a better place – one that benefits lives, communities and the planet. We are here to provide the means for every person to move and pursue their dreams, serving as a bridge between personal freedom and the future of mobility. In that pursuit, our 186,000 employees around the world help to set the pace of innovation every day. Privacy Policy: https://www.ford.com/help/privacy/

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 143,957
Subsidiaries: 35
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

General Motors

100 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan, US, 48243
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 750 and 799

General Motors’ vision is to create a world with Zero Crashes, Zero Emissions and Zero Congestion, and we have committed ourselves to leading the way toward this future. Today, we are in the midst of a transportation revolution, and we have the ambition, the talent and the technology to realize the safer, better and more sustainable world we want. As an open, inclusive company, we’re also creating an environment where everyone feels welcomed and valued for who they are. One team, where all ideas are considered and heard, where everyone can contribute to their fullest potential, with a culture based in respect, integrity, accountability and equality. Our team brings wide-ranging perspectives and experiences to solving the complex transportation challenges of today and tomorrow. For information on the GM Privacy Statement, please visit http://www.gm.com/privacy-statement.html

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 103,855
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ford-motor-company.jpeg
Ford Motor Company
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/general-motors.jpeg
General Motors
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
Ford Motor Company
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
General Motors
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ford Motor Company in 2025.

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

General Motors has 66.67% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Ford Motor Company (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ford Motor Company cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — General Motors (X = Date, Y = Severity)

General Motors cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ford-motor-company.jpeg
Ford Motor Company
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2020
Type:Vulnerability
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/general-motors.jpeg
General Motors
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Compromised Credentials
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2022
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Exploitation of on-board ports
Motivation: High horsepower and resale value
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Ford Motor Company company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to General Motors company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

General Motors company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Ford Motor Company company.

In the current year, General Motors company has reported more cyber incidents than Ford Motor Company company.

Neither General Motors company nor Ford Motor Company company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

General Motors company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Ford Motor Company company has not reported such incidents publicly.

General Motors company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Ford Motor Company company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Ford Motor Company company and General Motors company have disclosed vulnerabilities.

Neither Ford Motor Company nor General Motors holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Ford Motor Company company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to General Motors company.

Ford Motor Company company employs more people globally than General Motors company, reflecting its scale as a Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.

Neither Ford Motor Company nor General Motors holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ford Motor Company nor General Motors holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ford Motor Company nor General Motors holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ford Motor Company nor General Motors holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ford Motor Company nor General Motors holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ford Motor Company nor General Motors 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