Comparison Overview
DHL Express Japan

DHL Express Japan
東品川1-37-8, 品川区, 東京都 1400002, JP
Last Update: 20/04/2026
DHL Expressは、世界220以上の国と地域をスピーディーに結ぶエアネットワークを築き、国際エクスプレスのリーディングカンパニーとして、オンラインショッピングから企業の国際貿易まで、人々の生活やビジネスを国際輸送でサポートしています。 DHLジャパン株式会社について DHLジャパンは、DHLグループの日本支社として1972年にサービスを開始しました。 DHLジャパンは、Great Place To Work® Institute Japanが発表する、日本における「働きがいのある会社」ランキングにおいて、13年連続でベストカン...

Deutsche Post und DHL
DE
Last Update: 31/03/2026
Deutsche Post delivers mail and parcels in Germany. It is an expert provider of dialogue marketing and press distribution services as well as corporate communications solutions. We operate a nationwide transport and delivery network in Germany. We also deliver mail acr...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

DHL Express Japan







Deutsche Post und DHL






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Transportation, Logistics, Supply Chain and Storage Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for DHL Express Japan in 2026.
Incidents vs Transportation, Logistics, Supply Chain and Storage Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Deutsche Post und DHL in 2026.
Incident History - DHL Express Japan (X = Date, Y = Severity)
DHL Express Japan cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Deutsche Post und DHL (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Deutsche Post und DHL cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

DHL Express Japan

Deutsche Post und DHL
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.
In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.
UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.
FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.
FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.