Comparison Overview

Hainan Airlines

VS

Qantas

Hainan Airlines

Comprehensive Office Building No.21,Hainan Airlines Haikou Meilan Base, No.9, Meilan Airport Road, haikou, hainan, CN
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

Hainan Airlines holding company was established in 1993 from their main base in Haikou, and continued on to develop seven shipping bases in China with routes covering Asia and radiating into Europe, North America, Oceania and Africa. In all, Hainan Airlines has opened up almost 500 domestic and international flight routes, reaching almost 100 destinations. For over 20 years Hainan Airlines has embraced the concept of “Oriental hospitality” and advocates a “respect for the customer” service spirit. As a world-class aviation enterprise the “cherished experience” brand philosophy isn’t just our business, it’s our calling. Each year, Hainan Airlines provides thousands of passengers with safe, attentive service. We promote tourism, give peace of mind to loved-ones, meet the unique needs of our business travelers, and focus on making your safety and comfort, our priority. Today Hainan Airlines has over 10,000 employees all over the world, each with their own language, experience, and story. HNA cherishes each and every employee's knowledge and wholeheartedly respects each employee’s contribution. Our next milestone at Hainan Airlines is global diversification and the aggressive development of an international perspective. We can offer challenges, passion and possibilities and in return, we need your vision, experience and creativity.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 3,465
Subsidiaries: 20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Qantas

10 Bourke Road, None, Mascot, NSW, AU, 2020
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 0 and 549

We would like to acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of the local lands and waterways on which we live, work and fly. We pay our respects to Elders past and present.   Spirit is everything to us, and joining the Qantas team means bringing your spirit to ours. We have over 26,000 exceptional employees, and every year we fly millions of customers around Australia and the world – together.    If you hop on board with the team, you'll experience a workplace where creativity, diversity and innovation are encouraged. We aim to give every member of the Qantas Group the support to follow their dreams, face new challenges, and let their future take flight. Ultimately, people are our priority – those who work for us and those who travel with us.  For the latest information on the cyber incident: https://bit.ly/3I7jNfM Member of the oneworld Alliance. Please read the Qantas LinkedIn House Rules at http://bit.ly/QFhouserules

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 17,358
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
10
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/china-hainan-airlines.jpeg
Hainan Airlines
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/qantas.jpeg
Qantas
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
Hainan Airlines
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Qantas
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hainan Airlines in 2025.

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

Qantas has 2172.73% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Hainan Airlines (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hainan Airlines cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Qantas cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/china-hainan-airlines.jpeg
Hainan Airlines
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/qantas.jpeg
Qantas
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: exploitation of enterprise software vulnerability, dark web data leak
Motivation: financial gain (ransom), data monetization on dark web
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Vishing, Stolen OAuth Tokens, Salesforce Instance Exploitation (Salesloft’s Drift AI Chat Integration), Dark Web Data Leak Site (DLS), Social Engineering
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Monetization, Reputation Damage, Regulatory Pressure (GDPR Fines), Disruption
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Social Engineering
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Qantas company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Hainan Airlines company has not reported any.

In the current year, Qantas company has reported more cyber incidents than Hainan Airlines company.

Qantas company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Hainan Airlines company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Qantas company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Hainan Airlines company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Qantas company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Hainan Airlines company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Hainan Airlines company nor Qantas company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Hainan Airlines nor Qantas holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Hainan Airlines company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Qantas company.

Qantas company employs more people globally than Hainan Airlines company, reflecting its scale as a Airlines and Aviation.

Neither Hainan Airlines nor Qantas holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Hainan Airlines nor Qantas holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Hainan Airlines nor Qantas holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Hainan Airlines nor Qantas holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Hainan Airlines nor Qantas holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Hainan Airlines nor Qantas holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H