Comparison Overview
Codean Labs

Codean Labs
Winthontlaan 200, Utrecht, 3526 KV, NL
Last Update: 31/03/2026
Codean Labs ethical hackers evaluate the security of your solution and guide you towards vulnerability remediation, from design to production and beyond. Codean Labs is an innovator in the cybersecurity sector, with a team that combines several years of hacking backgrou...

Palo Alto Networks
3000 Tannery Way, SANTA CLARA, 95054, US
Last Update: 25/08/2026
Palo Alto Networks, the global cybersecurity leader, is shaping the cloud-centric future with technology that is transforming the way people and organizations operate. Our mission is to be the cybersecurity partner of choice, protecting our digital way of life. We help ...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Codean Labs







Palo Alto Networks






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)
Codean Labs has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)
Palo Alto Networks has 967.96% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Codean Labs (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Codean Labs cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Palo Alto Networks (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Palo Alto Networks cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Codean Labs

Palo Alto Networks
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Simple Online Food Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=login2. The manipulation of the argument email leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.
A flaw was found in the ipa_getkeytab module of the community.general Ansible collection. The module's bind_pw parameter, used to supply the LDAP simple-bind password when retrieving a Kerberos keytab, is not declared with no_log, unlike the sibling password parameter in the same module. As a consequence, the supplied IPA/LDAP bind password is recorded in cleartext in the managed host's system journal/syslog (the module's "Invoked with" record), is included in the module's return values and verbose (-v) output, and is displayed in Automation Controller / AWX job output. The password is additionally passed on the command line to the ipa-getkeytab helper (as --bindpw <value>), exposing it in the process list to local users while the command runs. An attacker able to read these logs, job output, or the process table can obtain the directory bind credential, potentially compromising the accounts and objects that credential can access.
The device metadata import interface /device/instance/{productId}/property-metadata/import of jetlinks community 2.11 is vulnerable to Server-side request forgery (SSRF).
disconf (Distributed Configuration Management Platform) 2.6.36 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control. The config-fetching APIs /api/config/item, /api/config/file, /api/config/list and /api/config/simple/list are exposed without authentication. The LoginInterceptor explicitly whitelists these four paths, so any anonymous attacker can read every configuration item and configuration file managed by the config center.
Funiture 1.0.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the backend tool interfaces /sys/tool/select.json and /sys/tool/update.json.