Comparison Overview

Ferrari

VS

Rivian

Ferrari

Abetone inferiore, Maranello, MO, IT, 41053
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 700 and 749

Ferrari's story officially began in 1947 when its first road car, the 125 S, emerged from the gate of no. 4 Via Abetone Inferiore in Maranello. The iconic two-seater went on to win the Rome Grand Prix later that year and shortly thereafter was developed into a refined GT roadster. The company has travelled a long way since then, but its mission has remained unaltered: to make unique sports cars that represent the finest in Italian design and craftsmanship, both on the track and on the road. The very definition of excellence and sportiness, Ferrari needs no introduction. Its principal calling card is the numerous Formula One titles it has won: a total of 16 constructors’ championships and 15 drivers’ championships. And of course, there is the impressive lineup of legendary GT models. Cars that are unique for their design, technology and luxurious styling and that represent the best in Italian the world over.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 9,613
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Rivian

14600 Myford Rd, Irvine, 92606, US
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799

Doing something different is never easy. It requires courage, optimism and grit. Core to our mission is building a team of adventurous individuals determined to make a positive impact on the world. This means challenging ourselves constantly. Stretching beyond the bounds of conventional thinking. Reframing old problems. Seeking new solutions. And operating comfortably in a space of uncertainty. While our backgrounds are diverse, our team shares a love of the outdoors and a desire to protect it for future generations. Do you like doing the impossible? We’d love to hear from you.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 11,844
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/ferrari.jpeg
Ferrari
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/rivian.jpeg
Rivian
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
Ferrari
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Rivian
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ferrari in 2025.

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Rivian in 2025.

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

Ferrari cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Rivian cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ferrari.jpeg
Ferrari
Incidents

Date Detected: 03/2023
Type:Breach
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2022
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Data theft and ransom
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 05/2022
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Subdomain Hacking
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rivian.jpeg
Rivian
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Rivian company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ferrari company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Ferrari company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Rivian company has not reported any.

In the current year, Rivian company and Ferrari company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Ferrari company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Rivian company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Ferrari company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Rivian company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Ferrari company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Rivian company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Ferrari company nor Rivian company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Ferrari nor Rivian holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Ferrari company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Rivian company.

Rivian company employs more people globally than Ferrari company, reflecting its scale as a Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.

Neither Ferrari nor Rivian holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ferrari nor Rivian holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ferrari nor Rivian holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ferrari nor Rivian holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ferrari nor Rivian holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ferrari nor Rivian 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