Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

ETQETQ
VS
DoorDashDoorDash
ETQ

ETQ

700 District Ave, Burlington, 01803, US

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.etq.com
753/1000Fair

ETQ, part of Hexagon, is the leading Quality, EHS, Food Safety and Compliance management software for identifying, mitigating and preventing high-risk events through integration, automation and collaboration. ETQ uses best-in-class integrated modules and enterprise app...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:289
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
DoorDash

DoorDash

San Francisco, US

Last Update: 07/10/2026

View Profile
640/1000Poor

At DoorDash, our mission to empower local economies shapes how our team members move quickly and always learn and reiterate to support merchants, Dashers and the communities we serve. We are a technology and logistics company that started with door-to-door delivery, and...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:82,975
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
9
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
ETQ

ETQ

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
DoorDash

DoorDash

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ETQ in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

DoorDash has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - ETQ (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ETQ cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - DoorDash (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DoorDash cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
ETQ

ETQ

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ETQ953072325
DoorDash

DoorDash

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
WOFAUBWALDOO1772749980
🔒 Incident : Breach
DOO5993759111725
🔒 Incident : Breach
DOO4104241112725

FAQ

Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between ETQ company and DoorDash company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between ETQ and DoorDash, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between ETQ and DoorDash, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - ETQ or DoorDash ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - ETQ or DoorDash ?
Between ETQ and DoorDash, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between ETQ and DoorDash, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-108773
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in erzhongxmu JEEWMS up to 2026.09.27-W39. Impacted is the function docheck of the file src/main/java/com/zzjee/wm/controller/WmOmNoticeHController.java. Performing a manipulation of the argument goodscode results in sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-108772
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in bleenco abstruse up to 2.1.0. This issue affects the function filepath.Join of the file server/api/worker/download_cache.go of the component Cache Endpoint. Such manipulation of the argument File leads to path traversal. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-108770
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Appwrite up to 2.3.0. This vulnerability affects the function PublicHostname of the file src/Appwrite/Platform/Modules/Avatars/Http/Screenshots/Get.php of the component Browser Screenshot Service. This manipulation of the argument url causes server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. Upgrading to version 2.4.0 is able to resolve this issue. Patch name: 393255e7302ae5503331d45802e2eee01c6a47fe. You should upgrade the affected component.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-108978
SUMMARY

Heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in Samsung Opensource rlottie allows Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables. This issue affects rlottie: e57b094f03c39a751a1fded6f7d6c13f1ed95ec9.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-108769
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in zhayujie CowAgent up to 2.2.0. This affects an unknown part of the file Markdown.tsx of the component Markdown Rendering. The manipulation results in denial of service. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:N/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8