Comparison Overview

Korean Air

VS

IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd)

Korean Air

260, Haneul-gil, Gangseo-gu, Seoul, 07505, KR
Last Update: 2025-12-29
Between 650 and 699

Leading Global carrier, a founding member of SkyTeam, operates more than 460 flights per day to 125 cities in 44 countries.

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

IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd)

Level 1, Tower C, Global Business Park,, Gurgaon, Haryana, 122 002, IN
Last Update: 2025-12-25
Between 750 and 799

How time flies. #18YearsOfIndiGo IndiGo is India’s largest passenger airline. We primarily operate in India’s domestic air travel market as a low-cost carrier with focus on our three pillars – offering low fares, being on-time and delivering a courteous and hassle-free experience. IndiGo has become synonymous with being on-time. Since our inception in August 2006, we have grown from a carrier with one plane to a fleet of 300+ aircraft today. A uniform fleet for each type of operation, high operational reliability and an award winning service make us one of the most reliable airlines in the world. IndiGo has a total destination count of 100+ destinations with 80+ domestic destinations and 30+ International destinations.

NAICS: 481
NAICS Definition: Air Transportation
Employees: 31,967
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/koreanair.jpeg
Korean Air
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/indigo-airlines.jpeg
IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd)
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
Korean Air
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd)
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Average (This Year)

Korean Air has 31.58% 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 IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) in 2025.

Incident History — Korean Air (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Korean Air cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/koreanair.jpeg
Korean Air
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/indigo-airlines.jpeg
IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd)
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Korean Air company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Korean Air company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company has not reported any.

In the current year, Korean Air company has reported more cyber incidents than IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company.

Neither IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company nor Korean Air company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Korean Air company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Korean Air company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Korean Air company nor IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Korean Air nor IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Korean Air company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company.

IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) company employs more people globally than Korean Air company, reflecting its scale as a Airlines and Aviation.

Neither Korean Air nor IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Korean Air nor IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Korean Air nor IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Korean Air nor IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Korean Air nor IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Korean Air nor IndiGo (InterGlobe Aviation Ltd) holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A vulnerability was found in Tenda WH450 1.0.0.18. Affected is an unknown function of the file /goform/PPTPUserSetting. Performing manipulation of the argument delno results in stack-based buffer overflow. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made public and could be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 8.3
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:C/I:C/A:C
cvss3
Base: 7.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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 has been found in Tenda WH450 1.0.0.18. This impacts an unknown function of the file /goform/PPTPServer. Such manipulation of the argument ip1 leads to stack-based buffer overflow. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 8.3
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:C/I:C/A:C
cvss3
Base: 7.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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 flaw has been found in omec-project UPF up to 2.1.3-dev. This affects the function handleSessionEstablishmentRequest of the file /pfcpiface/pfcpiface/messages_session.go of the component PFCP Session Establishment Request Handler. This manipulation causes null pointer dereference. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 4.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:N/A:P
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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 detected in floooh sokol up to 16cbcc864012898793cd2bc57f802499a264ea40. The impacted element is the function _sg_pipeline_desc_defaults in the library sokol_gfx.h. The manipulation results in stack-based buffer overflow. The attack requires a local approach. The exploit is now public and may be used. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The patch is identified as 5d11344150973f15e16d3ec4ee7550a73fb995e0. It is advisable to implement a patch to correct this issue.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 4.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/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 vulnerability has been detected in PbootCMS up to 3.2.12. The affected element is the function get_user_ip of the file core/function/handle.php of the component Header Handler. The manipulation of the argument X-Forwarded-For leads to use of less trusted source. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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