Comparison Overview

Alibaba Group

VS

PhonePe

Alibaba Group

969 West Wen Yi Road, Hangzhou, 311121, CN
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 800 and 849

🌍Alibaba Group is on a mission to make it easy to do business anywhere! Guided by our passion and imagination, we’re leading the way in AI, cloud computing and e-commerce. We aim to build the future infrastructure of commerce, and we aspire to be a good company that lasts for 102 years.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 83,762
Subsidiaries: 35
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

PhonePe

Green Glen Layout Road, Bengaluru East, Karnataka, 560103, IN
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

PhonePe Group is India’s leading fintech company, proudly recognized as India’s #1 Trusted Digital Payments* Brand for three consecutive years. Our flagship product, the PhonePe app was launched in August 2016, has rapidly become the preferred consumer payments app in India. In just eight years, PhonePe has gained over 57 crore + registered users and established a digital payments acceptance network of over 4 crore+ merchants spread across Tier 2,3 cites and beyond, covering 99% of the postal codes in the country. Building on our leadership in digital payments, PhonePe Group has expanded into financial services—including insurance, lending, and wealth management—along with new consumer tech ventures such as Pincode, a hyperlocal ecommerce platform, Indus App Store - India’s first localized app store, and Share.Market- A wealth and investment platform (app & website), catering to investors and traders needs. Headquartered in India, PhonePe Group aligns its diverse portfolio of businesses with our vision We're committed to empowering every Indian by unlocking the flow of money and providing equal access to easy & secure payments and financial services.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 15,345
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chinese-alibaba-group.jpeg
Alibaba 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/phonepe-internet.jpeg
PhonePe
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
Alibaba Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
PhonePe
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Alibaba Group in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PhonePe in 2025.

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

Alibaba Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

PhonePe cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chinese-alibaba-group.jpeg
Alibaba Group
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2023
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 09/2020
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Server-based data exfiltration
Motivation: Cyber espionage
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 01/2020
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Unauthenticated Elastic Search Engine Instances
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/phonepe-internet.jpeg
PhonePe
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Alibaba Group company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas PhonePe company has not reported any.

In the current year, PhonePe company and Alibaba Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither PhonePe company nor Alibaba Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Alibaba Group company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other PhonePe company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither PhonePe company nor Alibaba Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Alibaba Group company nor PhonePe company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Alibaba Group nor PhonePe holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Alibaba Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to PhonePe company.

Alibaba Group company employs more people globally than PhonePe company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither Alibaba Group nor PhonePe holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Alibaba Group nor PhonePe holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Alibaba Group nor PhonePe holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Alibaba Group nor PhonePe holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Alibaba Group nor PhonePe holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Alibaba Group nor PhonePe 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