Comparison Overview
Bromcom

Bromcom
Masons Hill, Rutland House, Bromley, England, GB
Last Update: 05/10/2026
Trusted by over 3.3 million users, Bromcom have been connecting the dots between data, people, and outcomes for the last 40 years. Our award-winning IT solutions have been developed and refined to give everyone in the education community the ability to harness the powe...

Wolt
Pohjoinen Rautatiekatu 21, Helsinki, Uusimaa, FI, 00100
Last Update: 01/10/2026
Wolt is a Helsinki-based technology company with a mission to bring joy, simplicity and earnings to the neighborhoods of the world. Wolt develops a local commerce platform that connects people looking to order food, groceries, and other goods with people interested in s...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Bromcom







Wolt






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
Bromcom has 3.85% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Wolt in 2026.
Incident History - Bromcom (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Bromcom cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Wolt (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Wolt cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Bromcom

Wolt
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.