Comparison Overview
Crunchyroll

Crunchyroll
5750 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles, 90036, US
Last Update: 04/04/2026
At Crunchyroll, we deliver what anime fans love—anytime, anywhere. With the world’s largest anime streaming library, we connect fans to the stories, characters, and creators they love. But Crunchyroll is more than just a destination to watch anime—it's a global ecosyst...

Universal Music Group
2220 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, 90401, US
Last Update: 14/09/2026
Universal Music Group (UMG) is the world leader in music-based entertainment, with a broad array of businesses engaged in recorded music, music publishing, merchandising and audiovisual content in more than 60 countries. Featuring the most comprehensive catalog of recor...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Crunchyroll







Universal Music Group






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Entertainment Providers Industry Avg (This Year)
Crunchyroll has 58.73% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Entertainment Providers Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Universal Music Group in 2026.
Incident History - Crunchyroll (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Crunchyroll cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Universal Music Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Universal Music Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Crunchyroll

Universal Music Group
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.
The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.
The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.
With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.
The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.