Comparison Overview

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

VS

Ethiopian Airlines

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

Amsterdamseweg 55, None, Amstelveen, None, NL, 1182 GP
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 700 and 749

Welcome to our LinkedIn page! To learn how we can assist you, please check: http://klmf.ly/ContactCentre. KLM was founded in 1919 and is the oldest airline in the world. With a vast network of European and intercontinental destinations, KLM can offer direct flights to major cities and economic centres all over the world. Through our LinkedIn account, we make sure you are kept up-to-date about KLM and other developments in the air transport industry.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 22,391
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
2

Ethiopian Airlines

Bole International Airport, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, ET, 1755
Last Update: 2025-12-01

Ethiopian Airlines Group (Ethiopian) is a true African success story, transforming a visionary dream into a globally renowned reality for nearly eight decades. Operating flights to more than 160 domestic and international passenger, and cargo destinations across five continents, Ethiopian bridges the gaps between Africa and the world. Emphasizing passenger comfort and environmental sustainability, Ethiopian utilizes ultra-modern aircraft such as Boeing 737s, 777s, 787s, Airbus A350-900, A350-1000, and De Havilland Q400. Ethiopian, the Star Alliance member airline since 2011, champions in various coveted awards including Skytrax’s ‘Best Airline in Africa Award’ for eight consecutive years, APEX ‘Best Overall in Africa’ award and ‘Leadership in Connecting Africa through Transport’ Award among others. Ethiopian aims to further excel in its success through a strategic plan dubbed ‘Vision 2035’ and become one of the top 20 most competitive and leading aviation groups in the world. Embracing a Pan-African spirit, Ethiopian is pursuing multi-hub strategy through hubs in Lomé, Togo with ASKY, in Lilongwe, Malawi with Malawi Airlines, in Lusaka, Zambia with Zambia Airways, and in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) with Air Congo.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 11,348
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/klm.jpeg
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
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/ethiopian-airlines.jpeg
Ethiopian Airlines
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
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Ethiopian Airlines
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines has 112.77% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ethiopian Airlines in 2025.

Incident History — KLM Royal Dutch Airlines (X = Date, Y = Severity)

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Ethiopian Airlines (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ethiopian Airlines cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/klm.jpeg
KLM Royal Dutch Airlines
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: AI-Amplified Social Engineering, Third-Party Customer Service Platform Exploitation, Voice Cloning, Deepfake Impersonation
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Monetization, Identity Theft, Loyalty Program Fraud
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Third-party system compromise
Motivation: Potential misuse in targeted scams
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ethiopian-airlines.jpeg
Ethiopian Airlines
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Ethiopian Airlines company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Ethiopian Airlines company has not reported any.

In the current year, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company has reported more cyber incidents than Ethiopian Airlines company.

Neither Ethiopian Airlines company nor KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Ethiopian Airlines company has not reported such incidents publicly.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Ethiopian Airlines company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company nor Ethiopian Airlines company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither KLM Royal Dutch Airlines nor Ethiopian Airlines holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Ethiopian Airlines company.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines company employs more people globally than Ethiopian Airlines company, reflecting its scale as a Airlines and Aviation.

Neither KLM Royal Dutch Airlines nor Ethiopian Airlines holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither KLM Royal Dutch Airlines nor Ethiopian Airlines holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither KLM Royal Dutch Airlines nor Ethiopian Airlines holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither KLM Royal Dutch Airlines nor Ethiopian Airlines holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither KLM Royal Dutch Airlines nor Ethiopian Airlines holds HIPAA certification.

Neither KLM Royal Dutch Airlines nor Ethiopian Airlines holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A weakness has been identified in codingWithElias School Management System up to f1ac334bfd89ae9067cc14dea12ec6ff3f078c01. Affected is an unknown function of the file /student-view.php of the component Edit Student Info Page. This manipulation of the argument First Name causes cross site scripting. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. This product follows a rolling release approach for continuous delivery, so version details for affected or updated releases are not provided. Other parameters might be affected as well. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 3.3
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 2.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 4.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/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
Description

By providing a command-line argument starting with a semi-colon ; to an API endpoint created by the EnhancedCommandExecutor class of the HexStrike AI MCP server, the resultant composed command is executed directly in the context of the MCP server’s normal privilege; typically, this is root. There is no attempt to sanitize these arguments in the default configuration of this MCP server at the affected version (as of commit 2f3a5512 in September of 2025).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

A weakness has been identified in winston-dsouza Ecommerce-Website up to 87734c043269baac0b4cfe9664784462138b1b2e. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /includes/header_menu.php of the component GET Parameter Handler. Executing manipulation of the argument Error can lead to cross site scripting. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. This product implements a rolling release for ongoing delivery, which means version information for affected or updated releases is unavailable. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

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
Description

A security flaw has been discovered in Qualitor 8.20/8.24. Affected by this vulnerability is the function eval of the file /html/st/stdeslocamento/request/getResumo.php. Performing manipulation of the argument passageiros results in code injection. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

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

A vulnerability was identified in Scada-LTS up to 2.7.8.1. Affected is the function Common.getHomeDir of the file br/org/scadabr/vo/exporter/ZIPProjectManager.java of the component Project Import. Such manipulation leads to path traversal. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

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