Comparison Overview

Axis Digital

VS

Expleo Group

Axis Digital

Near Sales Tax Office, Eranjipalam, Calicut, 673006, IN
Last Update: 2026-01-21

Website Design & Development |E-commerce Websites | Digital Marketing- [SEO-SMO-SEM-PPC] | Mobile Applications | Graphic Design | Logo Design | Accounting Software's | Digital Signature

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 17
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Expleo Group

3 avenue des Prés, Montigny-le-Bretonneux, Saint Quentin en Yvelines, Ile-de-France, FR, 78180
Last Update: 2026-01-21
Between 750 and 799

Expleo is a global engineering, technology and consulting service provider that partners with leading organisations to guide them through their business transformation, helping them achieve operational excellence and future-proof their businesses. Expleo benefits from more than 50 years of experience developing complex products, optimising manufacturing processes, and ensuring the quality of information systems. Leveraging its deep sector knowledge and wide-ranging expertise in fields including AI engineering, digitalisation, hyper-automation, cybersecurity and data science, the group’s mission is to fast-track innovation through each step of the value chain. As a responsible and diverse organisation, Expleo is committed to doing business with integrity and working towards a more sustainable and secure society. Expleo boasts an extensive global footprint, powered by 18,000 highly-skilled experts delivering value in 29 countries and generating more than €1.4 billion in revenue.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 14,056
Subsidiaries: 9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/axisdigitalpro.jpeg
Axis Digital
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/expleo-group.jpeg
Expleo Group
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
Axis Digital
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Expleo Group
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Axis Digital in 2026.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Expleo Group in 2026.

Incident History — Axis Digital (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Axis Digital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Expleo Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Expleo Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/axisdigitalpro.jpeg
Axis Digital
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Social Media, Phone Calls, Text Messages, Online Dating Services
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/expleo-group.jpeg
Expleo Group
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Expleo Group company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Axis Digital company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Axis Digital company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Expleo Group company has not reported any.

In the current year, Expleo Group company and Axis Digital company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Expleo Group company nor Axis Digital company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Expleo Group company nor Axis Digital company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Axis Digital company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Expleo Group company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Axis Digital company nor Expleo Group company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Axis Digital nor Expleo Group holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Expleo Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Axis Digital company.

Expleo Group company employs more people globally than Axis Digital company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither Axis Digital nor Expleo Group holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Axis Digital nor Expleo Group holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Axis Digital nor Expleo Group holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Axis Digital nor Expleo Group holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Axis Digital nor Expleo Group holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Axis Digital nor Expleo Group holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N