Comparison Overview
HCLTech – Asia-Pacific

HCLTech – Asia-Pacific
N/A
Last Update: 26/10/2025
HCLTech is a global technology company, home to more than 219,000 people across 60 countries, delivering industry-leading capabilities centered around digital, engineering, cloud and AI, powered by a broad portfolio of technology services and products. We work with clie...

HCLTech
Noida, Uttar Pradesh, IN, 201301
Last Update: 29/09/2026
HCLTech is a global technology company, home to more than 223,000 people across 60 countries, delivering industry-leading capabilities centered around AI, digital, engineering, cloud and software, powered by a broad portfolio of technology services and products. We work...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

HCLTech – Asia-Pacific







HCLTech






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for HCLTech – Asia-Pacific in 2026.
Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)
HCLTech has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - HCLTech – Asia-Pacific (X = Date, Y = Severity)
HCLTech – Asia-Pacific cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - HCLTech (X = Date, Y = Severity)
HCLTech cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

HCLTech – Asia-Pacific

HCLTech
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
HTTP/2 servers could end up crashing due to inadvertently modifying its HPACK encoder concurrently. This happens because the server modifies the HPACK encoder from two goroutines without synchronization: one uses the encoder to encode a HEADERS frame as part of a response sent to a client and the other modifies the encoder's table size when handling a SETTINGS frame containing SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE that a client sends. A malicious client can repeatedly send a request while changing the header table size to crash the server.
Multiple ECH outer extension references are not permitted under RFC 9849; previously, a client could send a well-crafted packet that could trigger memory exhaustion in the server process by specifying multiple references. We now reject these as malformed and curb the memory amplification vector as a result.
A trusted template author may have previously written a valid template wherein the use of the 'yield' keyword would not be correctly escaped. We now ensure that valid keyword uses are escaped and non-keyword uses are not escaped.
Improper certificate validation in Microsoft Partner Center allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.
Authorization bypass through user-controlled key in Microsoft Bookings allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.