Comparison Overview

Match

VS

Alibaba.com

Match

8750 N Central Expy, Dallas, Texas, 75231, US
Last Update: 2025-03-04 (UTC)
Between 800 and 900

Strong

Match pioneered the concept of online dating when we launched in 1995. Today, we're part of Match Group - a family of dozens of brands like Tinder and Hinge that are creating new ways to meet people, make friends, and build relationships that are fundamental to happiness. Millions of singles have found a meaningful connection using our products! HQโ€™d in Dallas, with offices in LA & NYC, Match is made up of teams from coast to coast. For three years in a row, weโ€™ve been recognized by the Dallas Morning News as a Top 100 Place to Work in Dallas. In 2022, over 5,000 companies competed for a spot in the Top 100 - this puts Match in the top 2% of companies to work for in DFW.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 916
Subsidiaries: 11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Alibaba.com

699 Wang Shang Road, Hangzhou, undefined, 310052, CN
Last Update: 2024-12-19 (UTC)

Strong

The first business of Alibaba Group, Alibaba.com (www.alibaba.com) is the leading platform for global wholesale trade serving millions of buyers and suppliers around the world. Through Alibaba.com, small businesses can sell their products to companies in other countries. Sellers on Alibaba.com are typically manufacturers and distributors based in China and other manufacturing countries such as India, Pakistan, the United States and Thailand. Our Mission As part of the Alibaba Group, our mission is to make it easy to do business anywhere. We do this by giving suppliers the tools necessary to reach a global audience for their products, and by helping buyers find products and suppliers quickly and efficiently. One-Stop Sourcing Alibaba.com brings you hundreds of millions of products in over 40 different major categories, including consumer electronics, machinery and apparel. Buyers for these products are located in 190+ countries and regions, and exchange hundreds of thousands of messages with suppliers on the platform each day. Anytime, Anywhere As a platform, we continue to develop services to help businesses do more and discover new opportunities. Whether itโ€™s sourcing from your mobile phone or contacting suppliers in their local language, turn to Alibaba.com for all your global business needs.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 28,148
Subsidiaries: 35
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/match-com.jpeg
Match
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/alibaba-com.jpeg
Alibaba.com
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
Match
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Alibaba.com
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Match in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Alibaba.com in 2025.

Incident History โ€” Match (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Match cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Alibaba.com (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Alibaba.com cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/match-com.jpeg
Match
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2017
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Cloudbleed Security Flaw
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 08/2015
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Malicious Advertisement
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/alibaba-com.jpeg
Alibaba.com
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2023
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 09/2020
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Server-based data exfiltration
Motivation: Cyber espionage
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 01/2020
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Unauthenticated Elastic Search Engine Instances
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Both Match company and Alibaba.com company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Alibaba.com company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Match company.

In the current year, Alibaba.com company and Match company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Alibaba.com company nor Match company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Alibaba.com company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Match company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Match company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Alibaba.com company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Match company nor Alibaba.com company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Alibaba.com company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Match company.

Alibaba.com company employs more people globally than Match company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A vulnerability was found in LaChatterie Verger up to 1.2.10. This impacts the function redirectToAuthorization of the file /src/main/services/mcp/oauth/provider.ts. The manipulation of the argument URL results in deserialization. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been made public and could 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
Description

A vulnerability has been found in SeriaWei ZKEACMS up to 4.3. This affects the function Delete of the file src/ZKEACMS.Redirection/Controllers/UrlRedirectionController.cs of the component POST Request Handler. The manipulation leads to improper authorization. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/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

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: jfs: fix invalid free of JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap in diUnmount syzbot found an invalid-free in diUnmount: BUG: KASAN: double-free in slab_free mm/slub.c:3661 [inline] BUG: KASAN: double-free in __kmem_cache_free+0x71/0x110 mm/slub.c:3674 Free of addr ffff88806f410000 by task syz-executor131/3632 CPU: 0 PID: 3632 Comm: syz-executor131 Not tainted 6.1.0-rc7-syzkaller-00012-gca57f02295f1 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/26/2022 Call Trace: <TASK> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:88 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x1b1/0x28e lib/dump_stack.c:106 print_address_description+0x74/0x340 mm/kasan/report.c:284 print_report+0x107/0x1f0 mm/kasan/report.c:395 kasan_report_invalid_free+0xac/0xd0 mm/kasan/report.c:460 ____kasan_slab_free+0xfb/0x120 kasan_slab_free include/linux/kasan.h:177 [inline] slab_free_hook mm/slub.c:1724 [inline] slab_free_freelist_hook+0x12e/0x1a0 mm/slub.c:1750 slab_free mm/slub.c:3661 [inline] __kmem_cache_free+0x71/0x110 mm/slub.c:3674 diUnmount+0xef/0x100 fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c:195 jfs_umount+0x108/0x370 fs/jfs/jfs_umount.c:63 jfs_put_super+0x86/0x190 fs/jfs/super.c:194 generic_shutdown_super+0x130/0x310 fs/super.c:492 kill_block_super+0x79/0xd0 fs/super.c:1428 deactivate_locked_super+0xa7/0xf0 fs/super.c:332 cleanup_mnt+0x494/0x520 fs/namespace.c:1186 task_work_run+0x243/0x300 kernel/task_work.c:179 exit_task_work include/linux/task_work.h:38 [inline] do_exit+0x664/0x2070 kernel/exit.c:820 do_group_exit+0x1fd/0x2b0 kernel/exit.c:950 __do_sys_exit_group kernel/exit.c:961 [inline] __se_sys_exit_group kernel/exit.c:959 [inline] __x64_sys_exit_group+0x3b/0x40 kernel/exit.c:959 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x3d/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd [...] JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap is not setting to NULL after free in diUnmount. If jfs_remount() free JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap but then failed at diMount(). JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap will be freed once again. Fix this problem by setting JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap to NULL after free.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: qla2xxx: Fix deletion race condition System crash when using debug kernel due to link list corruption. The cause of the link list corruption is due to session deletion was allowed to queue up twice. Here's the internal trace that show the same port was allowed to double queue for deletion on different cpu. 20808683956 015 qla2xxx [0000:13:00.1]-e801:4: Scheduling sess ffff93ebf9306800 for deletion 50:06:0e:80:12:48:ff:50 fc4_type 1 20808683957 027 qla2xxx [0000:13:00.1]-e801:4: Scheduling sess ffff93ebf9306800 for deletion 50:06:0e:80:12:48:ff:50 fc4_type 1 Move the clearing/setting of deleted flag lock.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/ksm: fix race with VMA iteration and mm_struct teardown exit_mmap() will tear down the VMAs and maple tree with the mmap_lock held in write mode. Ensure that the maple tree is still valid by checking ksm_test_exit() after taking the mmap_lock in read mode, but before the for_each_vma() iterator dereferences a destroyed maple tree. Since the maple tree is destroyed, the flags telling lockdep to check an external lock has been cleared. Skip the for_each_vma() iterator to avoid dereferencing a maple tree without the external lock flag, which would create a lockdep warning.