Comparison Overview

Dexels

VS

Google

Dexels

Grasweg 55, Amsterdam, undefined, 1031HX, NL
Last Update: 2025-03-08 (UTC)
Between 900 and 1000

Excellent

Dexels builds large scale IT solutions based on a Service Oriented Architecture. Its Navajo framework was specifically designed to allow Enterprises to rapidly develop and deploy server side business functions as a service. The Rich Client framework, Tipi, complements Dexels'โ€‹ Service Oriented Architecture Vision.

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 4
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Google

1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, None, Mountain View, CA, US, 94043
Last Update: 2025-08-10 (UTC)

Strong

Between 800 and 900

A problem isn't truly solved until it's solved for all. Googlers build products that help create opportunities for everyone, whether down the street or across the globe. Bring your insight, imagination and a healthy disregard for the impossible. Bring everything that makes you unique. Together, we can build for everyone. Check out our career opportunities at goo.gle/3DLEokh

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 314,945
Subsidiaries: 52
12-month incidents
15
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
5

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dexels-bv.jpeg
Dexels
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/google.jpeg
Google
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
Dexels
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Google
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Dexels in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Google has 3025.0% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History โ€” Dexels (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Dexels cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Google (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Google cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dexels-bv.jpeg
Dexels
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/google.jpeg
Google
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Email Spoofing, Messaging Platform (WhatsApp)
Motivation: Financial Gain (Fraudulent Services/Products) or Data Theft
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Memory Allocator Manipulation, Heap Spraying, Dangling Pointer Dereference, Function Pointer Overwrite, Virtual Function Table Corruption, Race Conditions in Multithreaded Code, Callback-Based Object Lifetime Exploitation, JavaScript Engine Manipulation (e.g., Chrome FileReader), Pointer Authentication Bypass
Motivation: Arbitrary Code Execution, Privilege Escalation, Data Corruption, Bypassing Security Mitigations (DEP, ASLR, CFI), Exploit Development for Malware Distribution, Targeted Attacks on Browsers/OS/Critical Infrastructure
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Use-After-Free (UAF) vulnerability in the Linux HFSC queuing discipline
Motivation: Security Research and Bounty
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Dexels company company demonstrates a stronger AI risk posture compared to Google company company, reflecting its advanced AI governance and monitoring frameworks.

Google company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Dexels company has not reported any.

In the current year, Google company has reported more cyber incidents than Dexels company.

Google company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Dexels company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Google company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Dexels company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Google company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Dexels company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Google company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Dexels company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Google company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Dexels company.

Google company employs more people globally than Dexels company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

TS3 Manager is modern web interface for maintaining Teamspeak3 servers. A reflected cross-site scripting vulnerability has been identified in versions 2.2.1 and earlier. The vulnerability exists in the error handling mechanism of the login page, where malicious scripts embedded in server hostnames are executed in the victim's browser context without proper sanitization. This issue is fixed in version 2.2.2.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

TS3 Manager is modern web interface for maintaining Teamspeak3 servers. A Denial of Dervice vulnerability has been identified in versions 2.2.1 and earlier. The vulnerability permits an unauthenticated actor to crash the application through the submission of specially crafted Unicode input, requiring no prior authentication or privileges. The flaw manifests when Unicode tag characters are submitted to the Server field on the login page. The application fails to properly handle these characters during the ASCII conversion process, resulting in an unhandled exception that terminates the application within four to five seconds of submission. This issue is fixed in version 2.2.2.

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

Weblate is a web based localization tool. An open redirect exists in versions 5.13.2 and below via the redir parameter on .within.website when Weblate is configured with Anubis and REDIRECT_DOMAINS is not set. An attacker can craft a URL on the legitimate domain that redirects a victim to an attacker-controlled site. The redirect can also be used to initiate drive-by downloads (redirecting to a URL that serves a malicious file), increasing the risk to end users. This issue is fixed in version 5.13.3.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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

Termix is a web-based server management platform with SSH terminal, tunneling, and file editing capabilities. The official Docker image for Termix versions 1.5.0 and below, due to being configured with an Nginx reverse proxy, causes the backend to retrieve the proxy's IP instead of the client's IP when using the req.ip method. This results in isLocalhost always returning True. Consequently, the /ssh/db/host/internal endpoint can be accessed directly without login or authentication. This endpoint records the system's stored SSH host information, including addresses, usernames, and passwords, posing an extremely high security risk. Users who use the official Termix docker image, build their own image using the official dockerfile, or utilize reverse proxy functionality will be affected by this vulnerability. This issue is fixed in version 1.6.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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

OpenPLC_V3 has a vulnerability in the enipThread function that occurs due to the lack of a return value. This leads to a crash when the server loop ends and execution hits an illegal ud2 instruction. This issue can be triggered remotely without authentication by starting the same server multiple times or if the server exits unexpectedly. The vulnerability allows an attacker to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) against the PLC runtime, stopping any PC started remotely without authentication. This results in the PLC process crashing and halting all automation or control logic managed by OpenPLC.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
cvss4
Base: 6.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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