Comparison Overview

Aena

VS

LATAM Airlines

Aena

Peonías, Madrid, Madrid, 28043, ES
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 800 and 849

Canal oficial de Aena, primer operador aeroportuario del mundo: 46 aeropuertos y 2 helipuertos en España más la gestión de otros 16 internacionales. Aena es una empresa líder por su experiencia, capacidad y equipo profesional en la gestión de servicios aeroportuarios. Ofrecemos a nuestros clientes y usuarios un servicio integral eficiente y de la máxima calidad para hacer de su paso por los aeropuertos una experiencia placentera. Los aeropuertos de la red de Aena son modernos y funcionales. Disponen de las últimas tecnologías diseñadas para facilitar a los pasajeros su estancia en el aeropuerto y de una variada oferta de servicios comerciales y restauración de la máxima calidad. Y están pensados para todos, con accesibilidad plena y un cuidado servicio de atención a las personas con movilidad reducida. Aena es una empresa responsable, consciente de que debe desempeñar su papel como motor económico en las áreas de influencia de los aeropuertos con un compromiso permanente de desarrollo y sostenibilidad.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 4,812
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

LATAM Airlines

Avenida Presidente Riesco 5711, Edificio Huidobro, Las Condes, Región Metropolitana de Santiago, CL, 7561114
Last Update: 2025-11-20

We are the leading airline in South America with the largest destinations, frequencies and aircraft fleet offer. We have the largest network of domestic destinations in five South American markets: Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru, and international operations in Latin America, Europe, the United States, Oceania and the Caribbean. Discover your next destination at latam.com Follow us on: Facebook: www.facebook.com/LATAMAirlines Twitter: www.twitter.com/LATAMAirlines YouTube: www.youtube.com/LATAMAirlines_EN Instagram: www.instagram.com/LATAMAirlines

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 41,715
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aena.jpeg
Aena
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/latam_airlines.jpeg
LATAM Airlines
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
Aena
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
LATAM Airlines
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Aena in 2025.

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LATAM Airlines in 2025.

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

Aena cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — LATAM Airlines (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LATAM Airlines cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aena.jpeg
Aena
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/latam_airlines.jpeg
LATAM Airlines
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, LATAM Airlines company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Aena company.

In the current year, LATAM Airlines company and Aena company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither LATAM Airlines company nor Aena company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither LATAM Airlines company nor Aena company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither LATAM Airlines company nor Aena company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Aena company nor LATAM Airlines company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Aena nor LATAM Airlines holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Aena company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to LATAM Airlines company.

LATAM Airlines company employs more people globally than Aena company, reflecting its scale as a Airlines and Aviation.

Neither Aena nor LATAM Airlines holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Aena nor LATAM Airlines holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Aena nor LATAM Airlines holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Aena nor LATAM Airlines holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Aena nor LATAM Airlines holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Aena nor LATAM Airlines holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H