Comparison Overview
MEDIFOX DAN

MEDIFOX DAN
Junkersstr. 1, Hildesheim, 31137, DE
Last Update: 27/03/2026
Bereits seit über 25 Jahren vertreibt die MEDIFOX DAN GmbH mit Sitz in der niedersächsischen Großstadt Hildesheim Softwares für das Gesundheitswesen. Nach der Gründung im Jahr 1994 wuchs das Unternehmen kontinuierlich an, sodass heute über 600 MitarbeiterInnen in den B...

N/A
Last Update: 01/04/2026
The Facebook company is now Meta. Meta builds technologies that help people connect, find communities, and grow businesses. When Facebook launched in 2004, it changed the way people connect. Apps like Messenger, Instagram and WhatsApp further empowered billions around t...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

MEDIFOX DAN













Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for MEDIFOX DAN in 2026.
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Facebook in 2026.
Incident History - MEDIFOX DAN (X = Date, Y = Severity)
MEDIFOX DAN cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Facebook (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Facebook cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

MEDIFOX DAN

FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains a path traversal vulnerability in MultiAgentMonitor that fails to sanitize agent IDs when building file paths. Attackers can include traversal sequences like ../ in agent IDs to read, write, or overwrite arbitrary files, enabling sensitive disclosure, denial of service, or code execution.
PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MultiAgentLedger component that allows attackers to access sensitive data by registering agents with duplicate IDs. Attackers can exploit the lack of agent ID uniqueness enforcement to share ledger instances and expose system prompts and conversation history between agents.
PraisonAI before 1.5.128 contains a cross-origin agent execution vulnerability in the AGUI endpoint that allows remote attackers to trigger arbitrary agent execution. The POST /agui endpoint lacks authentication and hardcodes Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * headers, combined with Starlette's Content-Type-agnostic JSON parsing, enabling attackers to bypass CORS preflight checks via simple requests and exfiltrate sensitive agent responses including tool execution results and environment data.
PraisonAI before 4.5.128 contains an arbitrary shell command execution vulnerability where the UI modules hardcode approval_mode to auto, overriding administrator configuration from PRAISON_APPROVAL_MODE environment variable. Authenticated attackers can instruct the LLM agent to execute arbitrary shell commands via subprocess.run with shell=True, bypassing the manual approval gate and insufficient command sanitization blocklists.
PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.