Comparison Overview

ezpz

VS

Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ

ezpz

17011 Lincoln #434, Parker, CO, 80134, US
Last Update: 2025-12-25
Between 750 and 799

ezpz is a woman-owned and women-run small business founded by Lindsey Laurain, a mom entrepreneur. ezpz's mission is to provide mealtime solutions from pre-feeding to first foods to feeding independence. As such, ezpzโ€™s products are designed with a Pediatric Feeding Specialist (M.S, CCC-SLP) to help little ones meet developmental milestones safely and effectively.

NAICS: 4541
NAICS Definition: Electronic Shopping and Mail-Order Houses
Employees: 47
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ

undefined, Southern California, undefined, undefined, US
Last Update: 2025-12-25
Between 750 and 799

Pets are our passion! Here at Pawstruck.com we provide a premier e-commerce website with the best in bully sticks, dog treats, dog bones, and more. We are a company of likeminded individuals with one goalโ€”providing our fellow dog lovers a website with high quality, safe and reasonably priced dog products. Above all else, we strive to keep your dog happy and healthy while supplying a fun and intuitive shopping experience.

NAICS: 454
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 7
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ezpz.jpeg
ezpz
โ€”
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pawstruck-com.jpeg
Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ
โ€”
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
โ€”
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
ezpz
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Online and Mail Order Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ezpz in 2025.

Incidents vs Online and Mail Order Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ in 2025.

Incident History โ€” ezpz (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ezpz cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ezpz.jpeg
ezpz
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pawstruck-com.jpeg
Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ezpz company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to ezpz company.

In the current year, Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company and ezpz company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company nor ezpz company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company nor ezpz company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company nor ezpz company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither ezpz company nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither ezpz nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither ezpz company nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

ezpz company employs more people globally than Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ company, reflecting its scale as a Online and Mail Order Retail.

Neither ezpz nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither ezpz nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither ezpz nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither ezpz nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither ezpz nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ holds HIPAA certification.

Neither ezpz nor Pawstruck ๐Ÿถ holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper Input Validation vulnerability in qs (parse modules) allows HTTP DoS.This issue affects qs: < 6.14.1. SummaryThe arrayLimitย option in qs does not enforce limits for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2), allowing attackers to cause denial-of-service via memory exhaustion. Applications using arrayLimitย for DoS protection are vulnerable. DetailsThe arrayLimitย option only checks limits for indexed notation (a[0]=1&a[1]=2) but completely bypasses it for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2). Vulnerable codeย (lib/parse.js:159-162): if (root === '[]' && options.parseArrays) { obj = utils.combine([], leaf); // No arrayLimit check } Working codeย (lib/parse.js:175): else if (index <= options.arrayLimit) { // Limit checked here obj = []; obj[index] = leaf; } The bracket notation handler at line 159 uses utils.combine([], leaf)ย without validating against options.arrayLimit, while indexed notation at line 175 checks index <= options.arrayLimitย before creating arrays. PoCTest 1 - Basic bypass: npm install qs const qs = require('qs'); const result = qs.parse('a[]=1&a[]=2&a[]=3&a[]=4&a[]=5&a[]=6', { arrayLimit: 5 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 6 (should be max 5) Test 2 - DoS demonstration: const qs = require('qs'); const attack = 'a[]=' + Array(10000).fill('x').join('&a[]='); const result = qs.parse(attack, { arrayLimit: 100 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 10000 (should be max 100) Configuration: * arrayLimit: 5ย (test 1) or arrayLimit: 100ย (test 2) * Use bracket notation: a[]=valueย (not indexed a[0]=value) ImpactDenial of Service via memory exhaustion. Affects applications using qs.parse()ย with user-controlled input and arrayLimitย for protection. Attack scenario: * Attacker sends HTTP request: GET /api/search?filters[]=x&filters[]=x&...&filters[]=xย (100,000+ times) * Application parses with qs.parse(query, { arrayLimit: 100 }) * qs ignores limit, parses all 100,000 elements into array * Server memory exhausted โ†’ application crashes or becomes unresponsive * Service unavailable for all users Real-world impact: * Single malicious request can crash server * No authentication required * Easy to automate and scale * Affects any endpoint parsing query strings with bracket notation

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
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

A weakness has been identified in code-projects Refugee Food Management System 1.0. This affects an unknown part of the file /home/editfood.php. This manipulation of the argument a/b/c/d causes sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: 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
Description

A security flaw has been discovered in code-projects Refugee Food Management System 1.0. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /home/editrefugee.php. The manipulation of the argument rfid results in sql injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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
Description

Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel vulnerability in Mobile Builder Mobile builder allows Authentication Abuse.This issue affects Mobile builder: from n/a through 1.4.2.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Hiroaki Miyashita Custom Field Template allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Custom Field Template: from n/a through 2.7.5.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L