Comparison Overview

JD.COM

VS

Airbnb

JD.COM

JD Building, No. 18 Kechuang 11 Street, BDA, Beijing, CN, 101111
Last Update: 2025-12-09
View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://corporate.jd.com/

JD.com, also known as JINGDONG, is a leading e-commerce company transferring to be a technology and service enterprise with supply chain at its core. JD.com’s business has expanded across retail, technology, logistics, health, property development, industrials, and international business. Ranking 44 on the Fortune Global 500, JD.com is China’s largest retailer by revenue. JD.com serves over 600 million customers and has set the standard for e-commerce through its commitment to quality, authenticity, and competitive pricing. The company operates the largest fulfillment infrastructure of any e-commerce company in China, enabling 90% of retail orders to be delivered within the same or next day. JD.com also promotes productivity and innovation across a range of industries by offering its cutting-edge technology and infrastructure to partners, brands, and diverse sectors.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 37,547
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Airbnb

888 Brannan Street, San Francisco, CA, US, 94103
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 800 and 849
http://airbnb.com

Airbnb was born in 2007 when two hosts welcomed three guests to their San Francisco home, and has since grown to over 5 million hosts who have welcomed over 2 billion guest arrivals in almost every country across the globe. Every day, hosts offer unique stays, experiences and services that make it possible for guests to connect with communities in a more authentic way.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 58,281
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jd.com.jpeg
JD.COM
—
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/airbnb.jpeg
Airbnb
—
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
JD.COM
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Airbnb
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for JD.COM in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Airbnb has 75.44% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — JD.COM (X = Date, Y = Severity)

JD.COM cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Airbnb cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jd.com.jpeg
JD.COM
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/airbnb.jpeg
Airbnb
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Phantom listing scam, Bait and switch scams, Fake positive reviews, Misleading property images, Delusive tactics
Motivation: Criminal intent or nefarious financial gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Airbnb company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to JD.COM company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Airbnb company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas JD.COM company has not reported any.

In the current year, Airbnb company has reported more cyber incidents than JD.COM company.

Neither Airbnb company nor JD.COM company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Airbnb company nor JD.COM company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Airbnb company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while JD.COM company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither JD.COM company nor Airbnb company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither JD.COM nor Airbnb holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Airbnb company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to JD.COM company.

Airbnb company employs more people globally than JD.COM company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither JD.COM nor Airbnb holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither JD.COM nor Airbnb holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither JD.COM nor Airbnb holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither JD.COM nor Airbnb holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither JD.COM nor Airbnb holds HIPAA certification.

Neither JD.COM nor Airbnb holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/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
References
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References