Comparison Overview

Cathay Pacific

VS

JetBlue

Cathay Pacific

Cathay City, Chek Lap Kok, undefined, undefined, HK
Last Update: 2025-12-09
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.cathaypacific.com

Welcome to the official Cathay Pacific LinkedIn page. We have over 200 destinations in our global network, but want to do more than just move you from A to B. We want to take you further in your journey, and ultimately, to move beyond. And we’re here to do what we can to help you discover what’s next. For flight and other inquiries, please contact us via WhatsApp (+852 2747 2747) and Facebook.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 13,834
Subsidiaries: 18
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

JetBlue

27-01 Queens Plaza North, Long Island City, New York, 11101, US
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799
http://www.jetblue.com

When JetBlue first took flight in February 2000, our founding goal was to bring humanity back to air travel, and over two decades later, we still put our customers, crewmembers and communities at the center of everything we do. Before we even had aircraft to fly, our founders selected five values to guide us, which are safety, caring, integrity, passion and fun. These core values shape our culture and empower our 23,000 crewmembers to deliver a meaningful JetBlue experience to more than 40 million customers that fly with us each year to more than 100 cities across the United States, Latin America, Caribbean, Canada and Europe. We’re proud to be New York's Hometown Airline®, and a leading carrier in Boston, Fort Lauderdale - Hollywood, Los Angeles, Orlando, and San Juan. Please note: If you have concerns or complaints that require response, please visit http://jetblue.com/chat.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 16,257
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cathay-pacific-airways.jpeg
Cathay Pacific
—
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/jetblue-airways.jpeg
JetBlue
—
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
Cathay Pacific
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
JetBlue
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Cathay Pacific in 2025.

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for JetBlue in 2025.

Incident History — Cathay Pacific (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cathay Pacific cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

JetBlue cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cathay-pacific-airways.jpeg
Cathay Pacific
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jetblue-airways.jpeg
JetBlue
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, JetBlue company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Cathay Pacific company.

In the current year, JetBlue company and Cathay Pacific company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither JetBlue company nor Cathay Pacific company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither JetBlue company nor Cathay Pacific company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither JetBlue company nor Cathay Pacific company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Cathay Pacific company nor JetBlue company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Cathay Pacific nor JetBlue holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Cathay Pacific company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to JetBlue company.

JetBlue company employs more people globally than Cathay Pacific company, reflecting its scale as a Airlines and Aviation.

Neither Cathay Pacific nor JetBlue holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Cathay Pacific nor JetBlue holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Cathay Pacific nor JetBlue holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Cathay Pacific nor JetBlue holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Cathay Pacific nor JetBlue holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Cathay Pacific nor JetBlue holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
References
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References