Comparison Overview

ExxonMobil

VS

Shell

ExxonMobil

US
Last Update: 2026-04-01
View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.exxonmobil.com

The need for energy is universal. That's why ExxonMobil scientists and engineers are pioneering new research and pursuing new technologies to reduce emissions while creating more efficient fuels. We're committed to responsibly meeting the world's energy needs. We aim to achieve #netzero emissions from our operated assets by 2050 (for Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas emissions) and are taking a comprehensive approach to create emission-reduction roadmaps for major operated assets. Find us also on: YouTube.com/ExxonMobil Find our latest Privacy Policy at https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/Global-legal-pages/privacy-policy See our terms and conditions at https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/global-legal-pages/terms-and-conditions Find resources on our GHG emission reduction efforts here: https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/resources

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition: Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees: 66,908
Subsidiaries: 37
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
View Profile

Shell

York Road, London, SE1 7NA, GB
Last Update: 2026-04-02
Between 800 and 849
http://www.shell.com

Shell is a global group of energy and petrochemical companies, employing 96,000 people across 70+ countries. We serve around 1 million commercial and industrial customers, and around 33 million customers daily at our Shell-branded retail service stations. Our purpose is to power progress together by working with each other, our customers and our partners. #PoweringProgress

NAICS: 211
NAICS Definition: Oil and Gas Extraction
Employees: 185,291
Subsidiaries: 12
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/exxonmobil.jpeg
ExxonMobil
—
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/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
Compliance Summary
ExxonMobil
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Shell
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ExxonMobil in 2026.

Incidents vs Oil and Gas Industry Average (This Year)

Shell has 56.33% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

ExxonMobil cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Shell cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/exxonmobil.jpeg
ExxonMobil
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Breach
Motivation: To protect corporate interests amid environmental scrutiny
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/shell.jpeg
Shell
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2026
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Web Application Vulnerability
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

ExxonMobil and Shell have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Shell company has reported more cyber incidents than ExxonMobil company.

Neither Shell company nor ExxonMobil company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

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

Neither Shell company nor ExxonMobil company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Shell company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while ExxonMobil company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Shell holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

ExxonMobil company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Shell company.

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

Neither ExxonMobil nor Shell holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Shell holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Shell holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Shell holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Shell holds HIPAA certification.

Neither ExxonMobil nor Shell holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

nimiq/core-rs-albatross is a Rust implementation of the Nimiq Proof-of-Stake protocol based on the Albatross consensus algorithm. Prior to version 1.3.0, two peer-facing consensus request handlers assume that the history index is always available and call blockchain.history_store.history_index().unwrap() directly. That assumption is false by construction. HistoryStoreProxy::history_index() explicitly returns None for the valid HistoryStoreProxy::WithoutIndex state. when a full node is syncing or otherwise running without the history index, a remote peer can send RequestTransactionsProof or RequestTransactionReceiptsByAddress and trigger an Option::unwrap() panic on the request path. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.0.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 1.5.95, FileTools.download_file() in praisonaiagents validates the destination path but performs no validation on the url parameter, passing it directly to httpx.stream() with follow_redirects=True. An attacker who controls the URL can reach any host accessible from the server including cloud metadata services and internal network services. This issue has been patched in version 1.5.95.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
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
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.97, OAuthManager.validate_token() returns True for any token not found in its internal store, which is empty by default. Any HTTP request to the MCP server with an arbitrary Bearer token is treated as authenticated, granting full access to all registered tools and agent capabilities. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.97.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.97, the PraisonAI Gateway server accepts WebSocket connections at /ws and serves agent topology at /info with no authentication. Any network client can connect, enumerate registered agents, and send arbitrary messages to agents and their tool sets. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.97.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.90, MCPToolIndex.search_tools() compiles a caller-supplied string directly as a Python regular expression with no validation, sanitization, or timeout. A crafted regex causes catastrophic backtracking in the re engine, blocking the Python thread for hundreds of seconds and causing a complete service outage. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.90.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References