Comparison Overview

Meituan

VS

Atlassian

Meituan

Wangjing International R&D Park, No.6 Wangjing East Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, CN, 100102
Last Update: 2025-11-21

Adhering to the ‘Retail + Technology’ strategy, Meituan commits to its mission that 'We help people eat better, live better'. Since its establishment in March 2010, Meituan has advanced the digital upgrading of services and goods retail on both supply and demand sides. Together with our partners we provide quality services for consumers. On 20 September, 2018, Meituan was listed on the Main Board of the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong. Meituan has always put customers first, and continuously increased its R&D investment in new technologies. Meituan will join hands with all partners to fulfill our social responsibility and create more values for the society.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 38,959
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Atlassian

Level 6/341 George St, Sydney, NSW, 2000, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Atlassian powers the collaboration that helps teams accomplish what would otherwise be impossible alone. From space missions and motor racing to bugs in code and IT requests, no task is too large or too small with the right team, the right tools, and the right practices. Over 300,000 global companies and 80% of the Fortune 500 rely on Atlassian’s software, like Jira, Confluence, Loom, and Trello, to help their teams work better together and deliver quality results on time. With our 300,000+ customers and team of 10,000+ Atlassians, we are building the next generation of team collaboration and productivity software. We believe the power of teams has the potential to change the world—one that is more open, authentic, and inclusive.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 17,274
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/meituan.jpeg
Meituan
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/atlassian.jpeg
Atlassian
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
Meituan
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Atlassian
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Meituan in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Atlassian in 2025.

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

Meituan cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Atlassian cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/meituan.jpeg
Meituan
Incidents

Date Detected: 05/2018
Type:Data Leak
Motivation: Financial
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/atlassian.jpeg
Atlassian
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2023
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Template Injection Vulnerability
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 02/2023
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Stolen Login Credentials
Motivation: Data Theft
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 06/2022
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Remote Code Execution
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Atlassian company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Meituan company.

In the current year, Atlassian company and Meituan company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Atlassian company nor Meituan company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Atlassian company nor Meituan company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Atlassian company nor Meituan company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Atlassian company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Meituan company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Meituan nor Atlassian holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Atlassian company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Meituan company.

Meituan company employs more people globally than Atlassian company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither Meituan nor Atlassian holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Meituan nor Atlassian holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Meituan nor Atlassian holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Meituan nor Atlassian holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Meituan nor Atlassian holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Meituan nor Atlassian 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