Comparison Overview

Asana

VS

TechCrunch

Asana

633 Folsom Street , San Francisco, California, 94107, US
Last Update: 2025-05-06 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799

Asana empowers organizations to work smarter. Asana is the only enterprise work management platform that connects company-wide goals, strategic initiatives, and the execution of work in one place. Asana has over 150,000 customers and millions of users in 200+ countries and territories. Customers like Amazon, Roche, and T-Mobile, rely on Asana to manage everything from goal setting and tracking to capacity planning, to product launches. For more information, visit www.asana.com.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 3,816
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

TechCrunch

680 Folsom St, None, San Francisco, California, US, 94107
Last Update: 2025-08-07 (UTC)
Between 700 and 749

TechCrunch, founded on June 11, 2005, is a news website dedicated to the tech scene. We provide breaking technology news, opinions, and analysis on tech companies from around the world. From publicly traded tech companies to emerging startups and venture capital funding rounds, TechCrunch is your number one guide for all things startups.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 486
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/asana.jpeg
Asana
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/techcrunch.jpeg
TechCrunch
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
Asana
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
TechCrunch
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Asana has 117.39% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

TechCrunch has 117.39% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Asana cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

TechCrunch cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/asana.jpeg
Asana
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Logic Flaw
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/techcrunch.jpeg
TechCrunch
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Asana and TechCrunch have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, TechCrunch and Asana have reported a similar number of cyber incidents.

Neither TechCrunch company nor Asana company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

TechCrunch company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Asana company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither TechCrunch company nor Asana company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Asana company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while TechCrunch company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Asana nor TechCrunch holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Asana company nor TechCrunch company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Asana company employs more people globally than TechCrunch company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither Asana nor TechCrunch holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Asana nor TechCrunch holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Asana nor TechCrunch holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Asana nor TechCrunch holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Asana nor TechCrunch holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Asana nor TechCrunch holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper authentication in the API authentication middleware of HCL DevOps Loop allows authentication tokens to be accepted without proper validation of their expiration and cryptographic signature. As a result, an attacker could potentially use expired or tampered tokens to gain unauthorized access to sensitive resources and perform actions with elevated privileges.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Improper handling of the authentication token in the Amazon WorkSpaces client for Linux, versions 2023.0 through 2024.8, may expose the authentication token for DCV-based WorkSpaces to other local users on the same client machine. Under certain circumstances, a local user may be able to extract another local user's authentication token from the shared client machine and access their WorkSpace. To mitigate this issue, users should upgrade to the Amazon WorkSpaces client for Linux version 2025.0 or later.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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

OSSN (Open Source Social Network) 8.6 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in /action/rtcomments/status via the timestamp parameter.

Description

A vulnerability in the XiaozhangBang Voluntary Like System V8.8 allows remote attackers to manipulate the zhekou parameter in the /topfirst.php Pay module, enabling unauthorized discounts. By sending a crafted HTTP POST request with zhekou set to an abnormally low value, an attacker can purchase votes at a reduced cost. Furthermore, by modifying the zid parameter, attackers can influence purchases made by other users, amplifying the impact. This issue stems from insufficient server-side validation of these parameters, potentially leading to economic loss and unfair manipulation of vote counts.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
Description

PocketVJ CP PocketVJ-CP-v3 pvj version 3.9.1 contains an unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability in the submit_opacity.php component. The application fails to sanitize user input in the opacityValue POST parameter before passing it to a shell command, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands with root privileges on the underlying system.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H