Comparison Overview
Endesa

Endesa
Calle de la Ribera del Loira, 60, Madrid, 28042, ES
Last Update: 02/05/2026
We are leaders in the Spanish electric power industry and the second operator in the Portuguese electric market. With more than 10 thousand employees, we provide our services to 12.6 million clients and our core business is the production, transportation, distribution a...

National Grid
1–3 Strand, London, WC2N 5EH, GB
Last Update: 07/05/2026
National Grid lies at the heart of a transforming energy system. Our business areas play a vital role in connecting millions of people to the energy they use, while continually seeking ways to make the energy system clean, fair, and affordable. In the UK we own and de...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Endesa







National Grid






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Utilities Industry Avg (This Year)
Endesa has 12.99% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Utilities Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for National Grid in 2026.
Incident History - Endesa (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Endesa cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - National Grid (X = Date, Y = Severity)
National Grid cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Endesa

National Grid
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains a path traversal vulnerability in MultiAgentMonitor that fails to sanitize agent IDs when building file paths. Attackers can include traversal sequences like ../ in agent IDs to read, write, or overwrite arbitrary files, enabling sensitive disclosure, denial of service, or code execution.
PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MultiAgentLedger component that allows attackers to access sensitive data by registering agents with duplicate IDs. Attackers can exploit the lack of agent ID uniqueness enforcement to share ledger instances and expose system prompts and conversation history between agents.
PraisonAI before 1.5.128 contains a cross-origin agent execution vulnerability in the AGUI endpoint that allows remote attackers to trigger arbitrary agent execution. The POST /agui endpoint lacks authentication and hardcodes Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * headers, combined with Starlette's Content-Type-agnostic JSON parsing, enabling attackers to bypass CORS preflight checks via simple requests and exfiltrate sensitive agent responses including tool execution results and environment data.
PraisonAI before 4.5.128 contains an arbitrary shell command execution vulnerability where the UI modules hardcode approval_mode to auto, overriding administrator configuration from PRAISON_APPROVAL_MODE environment variable. Authenticated attackers can instruct the LLM agent to execute arbitrary shell commands via subprocess.run with shell=True, bypassing the manual approval gate and insufficient command sanitization blocklists.
PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.