Comparison Overview

Dexels

VS

Pitney Bowes

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

Pitney Bowes

3001 Summer Street, None, Stamford, CT, US, 06926
Last Update: 2025-08-21 (UTC)

Strong

Pitney Bowes is a technology-driven products and services company that provides SaaS shipping solutions, mailing innovation, and financial services to clients around the world โ€“ including more than 90 percent of the Fortune 500. Small businesses to large enterprises, and government entities rely on Pitney Bowes to reduce the complexity of sending mail and parcels. For additional information, visit Pitney Bowes at www.pitneybowes.com.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 12,875
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

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/pitney-bowes.jpeg
Pitney Bowes
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
Pitney Bowes
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)

No incidents recorded for Pitney Bowes in 2025.

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

Dexels cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Pitney Bowes 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/pitney-bowes.jpeg
Pitney Bowes
Incidents

Date Detected: 05/2020
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2019
Type:Malware
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

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

In the current year, Pitney Bowes company and Dexels company have not reported any cyber incidents.

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

Neither Pitney Bowes company nor Dexels company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Pitney Bowes company nor Dexels company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Dexels company nor Pitney Bowes company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Pitney Bowes company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Dexels company.

Pitney Bowes 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