Comparison Overview

ACME Technologies Inc.

VS

Booking.com

ACME Technologies Inc.

1 Almaden Blvd, San Jose, 95113, US
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 700 and 749

ACME Ticketing (www.acmeticketing.com) is a cloud-based ticketing and membership transaction management platform for Museums, Aquariums, Zoos, Gardens, and Science Centers. With an open, flexible, and easy-to-use platform, we are transforming the way institutions engage with their visitors. Our enterprise cloud platform significantly improves consumer interactions with a venue and extends potential revenue by enabling unique product offerings including custom tours, group activities, or bundling of programs. Coupled with easy-to-use, intuitive interfaces for POS, mobile, and web, the ACME solution unifies the ticketing process, back office infrastructure, and integrates into third-party cloud systems including CRM, financial, and network management. We are headquartered in San Jose and are always looking for great talent to join the mission of helping our clients be successful. If you have chutzpah, love a fast-paced environment,​ and think you can help —send a resume to [email protected].

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 85
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Booking.com

Oosterdokskade 163, None, Amsterdam, North Holland, NL, 1011 DL
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

A career at Booking.com is all about the journey, helping you explore new challenges in a place where you can be your best self. With plenty of exciting twists, turns and opportunities along the way. We’ve always been pioneers, on a mission to shape the future of travel through cutting edge technology, to make it easier for everyone to enjoy amazing experiences wherever they go. Under a desert sky, or in the heart of a bustling city. Discovering the perfect hideaway, or the perfect paella. When you join us, you’ll be part of a community where taking a different path and trying something new is celebrated and supported. And where making a difference counts. We’re determined to make the world of travel more sustainable, more accessible, and more inclusive, to create a positive impact on a global scale. That’s why we’re always looking for people who search for better solutions, the ones eager to stray off the beaten path to find new ways of doing things. Because at Booking.com it’s more than a job, it’s a journey we’re on together.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 15,885
Subsidiaries: 11
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/acme-technologies-inc-.jpeg
ACME Technologies Inc.
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/booking.com.jpeg
Booking.com
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
ACME Technologies Inc.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Booking.com
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

ACME Technologies Inc. has 75.44% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Booking.com has 426.32% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — ACME Technologies Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ACME Technologies Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Booking.com (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Booking.com cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/acme-technologies-inc-.jpeg
ACME Technologies Inc.
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Suspicious User Request
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/booking.com.jpeg
Booking.com
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Mass-phishing, Infostealer trojans
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: compromised email accounts, phishing links, fake reCAPTCHA challenge, malware download (PureRAT), personalized WhatsApp messages, fake Booking/Expedia websites
Motivation: financial gain, data theft, fraudulent transactions
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 2/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: malicious domain registration, social engineering, phishing emails/websites
Motivation: financial gain, theft of payment details
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Booking.com company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to ACME Technologies Inc. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Booking.com company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to ACME Technologies Inc. company.

In the current year, Booking.com company has reported more cyber incidents than ACME Technologies Inc. company.

Neither Booking.com company nor ACME Technologies Inc. company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Booking.com company nor ACME Technologies Inc. company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Both Booking.com company and ACME Technologies Inc. company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither ACME Technologies Inc. company nor Booking.com company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither ACME Technologies Inc. nor Booking.com holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Booking.com company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to ACME Technologies Inc. company.

Booking.com company employs more people globally than ACME Technologies Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither ACME Technologies Inc. nor Booking.com holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither ACME Technologies Inc. nor Booking.com holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither ACME Technologies Inc. nor Booking.com holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither ACME Technologies Inc. nor Booking.com holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither ACME Technologies Inc. nor Booking.com holds HIPAA certification.

Neither ACME Technologies Inc. nor Booking.com holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Zerobyte is a backup automation tool Zerobyte versions prior to 0.18.5 and 0.19.0 contain an authentication bypass vulnerability where authentication middleware is not properly applied to API endpoints. This results in certain API endpoints being accessible without valid session credentials. This is dangerous for those who have exposed Zerobyte to be used outside of their internal network. A fix has been applied in both version 0.19.0 and 0.18.5. If immediate upgrade is not possible, restrict network access to the Zerobyte instance to trusted networks only using firewall rules or network segmentation. This is only a temporary mitigation; upgrading is strongly recommended.

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
Description

Open Source Point of Sale (opensourcepos) is a web based point of sale application written in PHP using CodeIgniter framework. Starting in version 3.4.0 and prior to version 3.4.2, a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the application's filter configuration. The CSRF protection mechanism was **explicitly disabled**, allowing the application to process state-changing requests (POST) without verifying a valid CSRF token. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this by hosting a malicious web page. If a logged-in administrator visits this page, their browser is forced to send unauthorized requests to the application. A successful exploit allows the attacker to silently create a new Administrator account with full privileges, leading to a complete takeover of the system and loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The vulnerability has been patched in version 3.4.2. The fix re-enables the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` and resolves associated AJAX race conditions by adjusting token regeneration settings. As a workaround, administrators can manually re-enable the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` by uncommenting the protection line. However, this is not recommended without applying the full patch, as it may cause functionality breakage in the Sales module due to token synchronization issues.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Model Context Protocol (MCP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious MCP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered automatically without any user interaction besides opening the project in the IDE. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Language Server Protocol (LSP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious LSP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered when a user opens project file for which there is an LSP entry. A concerted effort by an attacker to seed a project settings file (`./zed/settings.json`) with malicious language server configurations could result in arbitrary code execution with the user's privileges if the user opens the project in Zed without reviewing the contents. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Storybook is a frontend workshop for building user interface components and pages in isolation. A vulnerability present starting in versions 7.0.0 and prior to versions 7.6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, and 10.1.10 relates to Storybook’s handling of environment variables defined in a `.env` file, which could, in specific circumstances, lead to those variables being unexpectedly bundled into the artifacts created by the `storybook build` command. When a built Storybook is published to the web, the bundle’s source is viewable, thus potentially exposing those variables to anyone with access. For a project to potentially be vulnerable to this issue, it must build the Storybook (i.e. run `storybook build` directly or indirectly) in a directory that contains a `.env` file (including variants like `.env.local`) and publish the built Storybook to the web. Storybooks built without a `.env` file at build time are not affected, including common CI-based builds where secrets are provided via platform environment variables rather than `.env` files. Storybook runtime environments (i.e. `storybook dev`) are not affected. Deployed applications that share a repo with your Storybook are not affected. Users should upgrade their Storybook—on both their local machines and CI environment—to version .6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, or 10.1.10 as soon as possible. Maintainers additionally recommend that users audit for any sensitive secrets provided via `.env` files and rotate those keys. Some projects may have been relying on the undocumented behavior at the heart of this issue and will need to change how they reference environment variables after this update. If a project can no longer read necessary environmental variable values, either prefix the variables with `STORYBOOK_` or use the `env` property in Storybook’s configuration to manually specify values. In either case, do not include sensitive secrets as they will be included in the built bundle.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L