Comparison Overview

Another Axiom

VS

Epic Games

Another Axiom

None
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 700 and 749

Another Axiom is the development team for Gorilla Tag - With over 10 million downloads on the Meta Quest and PC VR platforms. Our passion is building Diegetic Virtual Realities. Instead of treating our world like a video game, we are building Gorilla Tag to make it feel like it’s a plausible, alternate space that could exist if the rules of reality were just a little bit different. People come away from our world with real dreams and memories of having been there with their friends. We are a flat organization that believes that everyone contributes to our products in their own way - That everyone should be encouraged to explore and participate in all aspects of game development with their own unique point-of-view to help us build a diverse product.

NAICS: 51126
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 74
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Epic Games

Cary, NC, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 700 and 749

Founded in 1991, Epic Games is a leading interactive entertainment company and provider of 3D engine technology. Epic operates Fortnite, one of the world’s largest games with over 350 million accounts and 2.5 billion friend connections. Epic also develops Unreal Engine, which powers the world’s leading games and is adopted across industries such as film and television, architecture, automotive, manufacturing, and simulation. Through Unreal Engine, Epic Games Store, and Epic Online Services, Epic provides an end-to-end digital ecosystem for developers and creators to build, distribute, and operate games and other content. Epic has over 40 offices worldwide with headquarters in Cary, North Carolina.

NAICS: 51126
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 10,599
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/another-axiom.jpeg
Another Axiom
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/epic-games.jpeg
Epic Games
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
Another Axiom
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Epic Games
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Computer Games Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Another Axiom in 2025.

Incidents vs Computer Games Industry Average (This Year)

Epic Games has 12.36% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Another Axiom (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Another Axiom cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Epic Games (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Epic Games cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/another-axiom.jpeg
Another Axiom
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: VPN usage
Motivation: Gain unfair advantage in the game
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/epic-games.jpeg
Epic Games
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Motivation: Financial Gain, Political Motivations
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2022
Type:Data Leak
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 08/2016
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Epic Games company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Another Axiom company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Epic Games company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Another Axiom company.

In the current year, Epic Games company has reported more cyber incidents than Another Axiom company.

Neither Epic Games company nor Another Axiom company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Epic Games company and Another Axiom company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Epic Games company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Another Axiom company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Another Axiom company nor Epic Games company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Another Axiom nor Epic Games holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Epic Games company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Another Axiom company.

Epic Games company employs more people globally than Another Axiom company, reflecting its scale as a Computer Games.

Neither Another Axiom nor Epic Games holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Another Axiom nor Epic Games holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Another Axiom nor Epic Games holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Another Axiom nor Epic Games holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Another Axiom nor Epic Games holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Another Axiom nor Epic Games 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