Comparison Overview
AIESEC

AIESEC
5605 Avenue de Gaspé, Montreal, CA
Last Update: 29/03/2026
AIESEC develops leadership among youth aged 18 to 30 and contributes to strengthening the global employability market by providing an end-to-end international talent recruitment solution for Enterprises, NGOs, and Start-ups. AIESEC is the world's largest youth-run orga...

Save the Children International
1 St. Johns Lane , London, England, GB, EC1M 4BL
Last Update: 13/09/2026
Save the Children Save the Children is the world's leading independent organisation for children. We work in around 120 countries. Our vision is to live in a world in which every child attains the right to survival, protection, development and participation. Last...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

AIESEC







Save the Children International






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Non-profit Organizations Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for AIESEC in 2026.
Incidents vs Non-profit Organizations Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Save the Children International in 2026.
Incident History - AIESEC (X = Date, Y = Severity)
AIESEC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Save the Children International (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Save the Children International cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

AIESEC

Save the Children International
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.