Comparison Overview

LinkedIn

VS

Snowflake

LinkedIn

1000 W Maude, None, Sunnyvale, CA, US, 94085
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 800 and 849

Founded in 2003, LinkedIn connects the world's professionals to make them more productive and successful. With more than 1 billion members worldwide, including executives from every Fortune 500 company, LinkedIn is the world's largest professional network. The company has a diversified business model with revenue coming from Talent Solutions, Marketing Solutions, Sales Solutions and Premium Subscriptions products. Headquartered in Silicon Valley, LinkedIn has offices across the globe..

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 23,853
Subsidiaries: 34
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

Snowflake

The Cloud, US
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

**Snowflake is proud to be the Official Data Collaboration Provider for LA28 and Team USA.** Snowflake delivers the AI Data Cloud — a global network where thousands of organizations mobilize data with near-unlimited scale, concurrency, and performance. Inside the AI Data Cloud, organizations unite their siloed data, easily discover and securely share governed data, and execute diverse analytic workloads. Wherever data or users live, Snowflake delivers a single and seamless experience across multiple public clouds. Snowflake’s platform is the engine that powers and provides access to the AI Data Cloud, creating a solution for data warehousing, data lakes, data engineering, data science, data application development, and data sharing. Join Snowflake customers, partners, and data providers already taking their businesses to new frontiers in the AI Data Cloud.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 10,269
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/linkedin.jpeg
LinkedIn
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/snowflake-computing.jpeg
Snowflake
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
LinkedIn
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Snowflake
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LinkedIn in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Snowflake in 2025.

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

LinkedIn cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Snowflake cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/linkedin.jpeg
LinkedIn
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2016
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2016
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Network Intrusion
Motivation: Data Theft
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2012
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/snowflake-computing.jpeg
Snowflake
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2024
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Third-party contractor's employee
Motivation: Theft of customer credentials
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2023
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Multi-Channel Phishing (Email, SMS, Instant Messaging, Social Media, Malvertising), Malicious Links (Obfuscated, Hosted on Legitimate SaaS/Cloud Services), Fake CAPTCHA/Cloudflare Turnstile Lures (ClickFix), OAuth App Authorization Tricks (Device Code Flow, Salesforce Exploit), Malicious Browser Extensions (Takeover or New Installations), Malicious File Downloads (HTA, SVG, Executables), Stolen Credentials (From Phishing/Infostealers), MFA Gaps (Ghost Logins, SSO Misconfigurations)
Motivation: Data Theft (Extortion, Dark Web Sales), Financial Gain (Ransomware, Fraud), Account Takeover (Business Email Compromise, SaaS Abuse), Espionage (Corporate/Competitive Intelligence)
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

LinkedIn and Snowflake have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Snowflake company and LinkedIn company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Snowflake company nor LinkedIn company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Snowflake company and LinkedIn company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Snowflake company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while LinkedIn company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither LinkedIn company nor Snowflake company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither LinkedIn nor Snowflake holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

LinkedIn company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Snowflake company.

LinkedIn company employs more people globally than Snowflake company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither LinkedIn nor Snowflake holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither LinkedIn nor Snowflake holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither LinkedIn nor Snowflake holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither LinkedIn nor Snowflake holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither LinkedIn nor Snowflake holds HIPAA certification.

Neither LinkedIn nor Snowflake holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H