Comparison Overview

Etihad

VS

Air France

Etihad

P.O. Box 35566, New Airport Road, Khalifa City A, Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, AE, 35566
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

Marhaba! Welcome to Etihad Airways. We are proud to be the national airline of the UAE, flying to 100+ destinations via Abu Dhabi. At Etihad, we don't stop at the border of what's possible, we go beyond it. Proudly inspired by our Emirati identity, we are dedicated to delivering extraordinary travel experiences, helping our guests realise their ambitions. Our journey started in 2003. Since then, we have proudly helped millions of guests travel the globe. We are honoured to have had over 12 million valued members join our Etihad Guest loyalty programme. Diversity is key in driving us forward. At 12,000+ employees representing 140+ nationalities, our team comes together to deliver exceptional experiences at every stage of the journey. If you share our spirit of ambition and would like to reach new heights, visit https://careers.etihad.com/

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 13,927
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Air France

45 , rue de Paris, None, Roissy CDG, None, FR, 95747
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

Depuis 1933, la compagnie Air France porte haut les couleurs de la France à travers le monde entier. Avec une activité, répartie entre le transport aérien de passagers, le fret, la maintenance et l’entretien aéronautique, Air France est un acteur majeur du secteur aérien. Plus de 45 000 collaborateurs se mobilisent au quotidien pour proposer à chaque client, une expérience de voyage unique. Air France, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines et Transavia forment le Groupe Air France-KLM. Le Groupe s’appuie sur la force de ses hubs de Paris-Charles de Gaulle et d’Amsterdam-Schiphol pour offrir un vaste réseau international. Son programme de fidélité Flying Blue rassemble plus de 17 millions d’adhérents. Air France et KLM sont membres de l’alliance SkyTeam qui compte au total, 19 compagnies aériennes. Air France place la santé et la sécurité de ses clients et de ses personnels au cœur de ses préoccupations. Avec Air France Protect, son engagement sanitaire, la compagnie a instauré les mesures sanitaires les plus strictes pour un voyage en toute sécurité. Air France s’est fixé des objectifs ambitieux en matière de développement durable et travaille à réduire et compenser ses émissions de CO2. Dans le cadre du programme Horizon 2030, la compagnie s’est engagée à réduire de 50% ses émissions de CO2 par passager-kilomètre d’ici à 2030 à travers des investissements importants en faveur du renouvellement de sa flotte par des avions de nouvelle génération, l’utilisation de solutions innovantes pour réduire sa consommation de carburant ou encore l’utilisation progressive de carburants alternatifs durables. Plus d'informations sur : corporate.airfrance.com

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 29,688
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/etihadairways.jpeg
Etihad
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/air-france.jpeg
Air France
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
Etihad
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Air France
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

Etihad has 122.22% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

Air France has 122.22% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Etihad cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Air France (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Air France cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/etihadairways.jpeg
Etihad
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2013
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Third-party attack
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/air-france.jpeg
Air France
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: AI-Amplified Social Engineering, Third-Party Customer Service Platform Exploitation, Voice Cloning, Deepfake Impersonation
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Monetization, Identity Theft, Loyalty Program Fraud
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Third-party service provider compromise
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Air France company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Etihad company.

In the current year, Air France company has reported more cyber incidents than Etihad company.

Neither Air France company nor Etihad company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Air France company and Etihad company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Both Air France company and Etihad company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither Etihad company nor Air France company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Etihad nor Air France holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Air France company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Etihad company.

Air France company employs more people globally than Etihad company, reflecting its scale as a Airlines and Aviation.

Neither Etihad nor Air France holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Etihad nor Air France holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Etihad nor Air France holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Etihad nor Air France holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Etihad nor Air France holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Etihad nor Air France 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