Comparison Overview

eClerx

VS

Globant

eClerx

29 Bank Street, Fort, 1st Floor, Mumbai, Maharashtra, IN, 400 023
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 750 and 799

eClerx is a productized services company, bringing together people, technology and domain expertise to amplify business results. Our mission is to set the benchmark for client service and success in our industry. Our vision is to be the innovation partner of choice for technology, data analytics and process management services.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 18,712
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Globant

875 Howard St, San Francisco, CA, 94103, US
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 700 and 749

At Globant, we create the digitally-native products that people love. We bridge the gap between businesses and consumers through technology and creativity, leveraging our experience as an AI powerhouse. We dare to digitally transform organizations and strive to delight their customers. - We have more than 29,100 employees and are present in 33 countries across 5 continents, working for companies like Google, Electronic Arts, and Santander, among others. - We were named a Worldwide Leader in AI Services (2023) and a Worldwide Leader in CX Improvement Services (2020) by IDC MarketScape report. - We are the fastest-growing IT brand and the 5th strongest IT brand globally (2024), according to Brand Finance. - We were featured as a business case study at Harvard, MIT, and Stanford. - We are active members of The Green Software Foundation (GSF) and the Cybersecurity Tech Accord. For more information, visit https://bit.ly/globant_com Follow us: http://www.twitter.com/globant http://www.youtube.com/Globant http://www.facebook.com/Globant https://instagram.com/Globant https://www.tiktok.com/@globant

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 28,472
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/eclerx.jpeg
eClerx
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/globant.jpeg
Globant
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
eClerx
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Globant
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for eClerx in 2025.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Globant in 2025.

Incident History — eClerx (X = Date, Y = Severity)

eClerx cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Globant (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Globant cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/eclerx.jpeg
eClerx
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/globant.jpeg
Globant
Incidents

Date Detected: 03/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Compromised Credentials, Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

eClerx company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Globant company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

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

In the current year, Globant company and eClerx company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Globant company nor eClerx company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

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

Neither Globant company nor eClerx company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither eClerx company nor Globant company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither eClerx nor Globant holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Globant company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to eClerx company.

Globant company employs more people globally than eClerx company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Neither eClerx nor Globant holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither eClerx nor Globant holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither eClerx nor Globant holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither eClerx nor Globant holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither eClerx nor Globant holds HIPAA certification.

Neither eClerx nor Globant holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

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