Comparison Overview

Aeropuertos GAP

VS

JetBlue

Aeropuertos GAP

Avenida Mariano Otero No. 1249-B Piso 6, Torre Pacífico, Rinconada del Bosque, , None, Guadalajara, , Jalisco , MX, C.P. 44530
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Somos una empresa mexicana que desarrolla su actividad en el sector aeroportuario. Operamos 12 aeropuertos internacionales en México y 2 en Jamaica, sirviendo en conjunto a más de 350 destinos, a través de 37 aerolíneas. En 2022, atendimos a 56.7 millones de pasajeros. Creemos en el valor de cada individuo y buscamos detonar su potencial por medio de la Fundación GAP integrada por los Colegios GAP y los Centros Comunitarios de Formación que ofrecen educación de calidad a familias de bajos recursos y oportunidades para elevar la calidad de vida a la comunidad aeroportuaria.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 782
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

JetBlue

27-01 Queens Plaza North, Long Island City, New York, 11101, US
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

When JetBlue first took flight in February 2000, our founding goal was to bring humanity back to air travel, and over two decades later, we still put our customers, crewmembers and communities at the center of everything we do. Before we even had aircraft to fly, our founders selected five values to guide us, which are safety, caring, integrity, passion and fun. These core values shape our culture and empower our 23,000 crewmembers to deliver a meaningful JetBlue experience to more than 40 million customers that fly with us each year to more than 100 cities across the United States, Latin America, Caribbean, Canada and Europe. We’re proud to be New York's Hometown Airline®, and a leading carrier in Boston, Fort Lauderdale - Hollywood, Los Angeles, Orlando, and San Juan. Please note: If you have concerns or complaints that require response, please visit http://jetblue.com/chat.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 16,257
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aeropuertosgap.jpeg
Aeropuertos GAP
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/jetblue-airways.jpeg
JetBlue
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
Aeropuertos GAP
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
JetBlue
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Aeropuertos GAP in 2025.

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for JetBlue in 2025.

Incident History — Aeropuertos GAP (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Aeropuertos GAP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

JetBlue cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aeropuertosgap.jpeg
Aeropuertos GAP
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jetblue-airways.jpeg
JetBlue
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, JetBlue company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Aeropuertos GAP company.

In the current year, JetBlue company and Aeropuertos GAP company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither JetBlue company nor Aeropuertos GAP company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither JetBlue company nor Aeropuertos GAP company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither JetBlue company nor Aeropuertos GAP company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Aeropuertos GAP company nor JetBlue company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Aeropuertos GAP nor JetBlue holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

JetBlue company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Aeropuertos GAP company.

JetBlue company employs more people globally than Aeropuertos GAP company, reflecting its scale as a Airlines and Aviation.

Neither Aeropuertos GAP nor JetBlue holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Aeropuertos GAP nor JetBlue holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Aeropuertos GAP nor JetBlue holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Aeropuertos GAP nor JetBlue holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Aeropuertos GAP nor JetBlue holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Aeropuertos GAP nor JetBlue 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