Comparison Overview
Hero Cosmetics

Hero Cosmetics
New York, 10013, US
Last Update: 09/03/2026
We started Hero Cosmetics with one goal — to create solutions-oriented products that can be a "hero" product when your skin is in a pinch. Our approach is simple — be mindful of the ingredients we use and avoid ingredients like parabens, alcohol and sulfates, be gentl...

Avon
Nunn Mills Road, Northampton, GB, NN1 5PA
Last Update: 16/09/2026
Think you know Avon? Think again. We’ve been doing beauty differently for 135 years. Pioneering in listening to women’s needs and speaking out for them. Standing for what matters to them. Supporting their endeavours. We’re a company that connects people through bea...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Hero Cosmetics







Avon






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Personal Care Product Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Hero Cosmetics in 2026.
Incidents vs Personal Care Product Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Avon in 2026.
Incident History - Hero Cosmetics (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Hero Cosmetics cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Avon (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Avon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Hero Cosmetics

Avon
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.