Comparison Overview
Duo Security
Duo Security
123 N Ashley St, Ann Arbor, 48104, US
Last Update: 24/01/2026
We are Duo, and we’re here to democratize security. We were born from a hacker ethos and a desire to make the Internet a secure place. Our mission is to protect the mission of our customers by making security simple for everyone. Our team is our secret weapon. We’re ...
Palo Alto Networks
3000 Tannery Way, SANTA CLARA, 95054, US
Last Update: 16/10/2026
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
Duo Security
Palo Alto Networks
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Duo Security in 2026.
Incidents vs Computer and Network Security Industry Avg (This Year)
Palo Alto Networks has 1370.59% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Duo Security (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Duo Security 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
Duo Security
Palo Alto Networks
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
A flaw was found in nfs-utils. An unauthenticated remote attacker can trigger a Denial of Service (DoS) by sending repeated state notification requests to an exposed rpc.statd service. The service fails to properly release memory allocated during callback processing, leading to continuous memory growth. Sustained requests can exhaust system resources, eventually causing the service to degrade or crash.
A flaw was found in parted. A heap-based buffer overflow exists in libparted's file system resizing logic when handling FAT16 volumes. By convincing a user or administrator to resize a specially crafted FAT16 file system image with malformed directory metadata, an attacker can trigger an oversized read into a fixed-size memory buffer. This issue causes memory corruption, resulting in an application crash and a denial of service (DoS).
A flaw was found in parted. A heap-based buffer overflow can occur when processing a specially crafted FAT32 filesystem due to an integer calculation error during buffer allocation. A local attacker could exploit this by enticing a user or automated service to open a malicious filesystem image, resulting in an application crash leading to a Denial of Service (DoS) or potential memory corruption.
A flaw was found in libarchive. An attacker can cause a Denial of Service (DoS) or potential information disclosure due to a use-after-free vulnerability, which occurs when a program reads memory that has already been released. This issue arises when the archive_entry_copy_mac_metadata() function deallocates an internal buffer before completing a data copy. An attacker who can supply input to an application utilizing this function can trigger the flaw to crash the application or read uninitialized memory data.
A flaw was found in Nautilus. When a removable drive or disk image is unmounted or ejected, Nautilus prompts the user to empty the trash without verifying whether the trash directory paths are symbolic links. An attacker can exploit this flaw by tricking a user into mounting a crafted storage volume and confirming the prompt to empty the trash, leading to the arbitrary deletion of files accessible to that user.