Comparison Overview

Mercedes-Benz AG

VS

Scania Group

Mercedes-Benz AG

Am Wallgraben, Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, DE, 70563
Last Update: 2025-12-09

"Love of invention will never end." - Carl Benz Learn more about us as we continue to pioneer the future of driving excellence. Data privacy: mb4.me/provider_privacy Mercedes-Benz AG Mercedesstraße 120 70372 Stuttgart Germany Phone: +49 7 11 17-0 E-Mail: [email protected] For inquiries regarding the content on this website, please contact any of the provided contacts. You may address your concerns in English or your respective native language. Represented by the Board of Management: Ola Källenius, Chairman; Jörg Burzer, Mathias Geisen, Renata Jungo Brüngger, Markus Schäfer, Britta Seeger, Oliver Thöne, Harald Wilhelm Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Martin Brudermüller Court of Registry: Stuttgart; commercial register no. 76 2873 VAT ID: DE321281763

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 35,360
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Scania Group

Vagnmakarvägen 1, Södertälje, SE, SE-151 87
Last Update: 2025-12-09

Scania is a world-leading provider of transport solutions committed to a better tomorrow. Our purpose is to drive the shift towards a sustainable transport system. In doing so, we are creating a world of mobility that’s better for business, society and our environment. Employing more than 50,000 people in about 100 countries, Scania’s research and development is concentrated in Sweden, while production takes place in Europe and South America.

NAICS: 3361
NAICS Definition: Motor Vehicle Manufacturing
Employees: 30,301
Subsidiaries: 10
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mercedes-benz_ag.jpeg
Mercedes-Benz AG
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/scania.jpeg
Scania Group
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
Mercedes-Benz AG
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Scania Group
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Mercedes-Benz AG in 2025.

Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

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

Incident History — Mercedes-Benz AG (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mercedes-Benz AG cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Scania Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Scania Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mercedes-benz_ag.jpeg
Mercedes-Benz AG
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2019
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Application Vulnerability
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/scania.jpeg
Scania Group
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Compromised Credentials
Motivation: Extortion
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Mercedes-Benz AG company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Scania Group company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Mercedes-Benz AG and Scania Group have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Scania Group company has reported more cyber incidents than Mercedes-Benz AG company.

Neither Scania Group company nor Mercedes-Benz AG company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Scania Group company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Mercedes-Benz AG company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Scania Group company nor Mercedes-Benz AG company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Mercedes-Benz AG company nor Scania Group company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Mercedes-Benz AG nor Scania Group holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Scania Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Mercedes-Benz AG company.

Mercedes-Benz AG company employs more people globally than Scania Group company, reflecting its scale as a Motor Vehicle Manufacturing.

Neither Mercedes-Benz AG nor Scania Group holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Mercedes-Benz AG nor Scania Group holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Mercedes-Benz AG nor Scania Group holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Mercedes-Benz AG nor Scania Group holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Mercedes-Benz AG nor Scania Group holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Mercedes-Benz AG nor Scania Group 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