Comparison Overview

Meta

VS

DoorDash

Meta

1 Hacker Way, Menlo Park, CA, US, 94025
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 700 and 749

Meta's mission is to build the future of human connection and the technology that makes it possible. Our technologies 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 the world. Now, Meta is moving beyond 2D screens toward immersive experiences like augmented and virtual reality to help build the next evolution in social technology. To help create a safe and respectful online space, we encourage constructive conversations on this page. Please note the following: • Start with an open mind. Whether you agree or disagree, engage with empathy. • Comments violating our Community Standards will be removed or hidden. Please treat everybody with respect. • Keep it constructive. Use your interactions here to learn about and grow your understanding of others. • Our moderators are here to uphold these guidelines for the benefit of everyone, every day. • If you are seeking support for issues related to your Facebook account, please reference our Help Center (https://www.facebook.com/help) or Help Community (https://www.facebook.com/help/community). For a full listing of our jobs, visit https://www.metacareers.com

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 140,153
Subsidiaries: 21
12-month incidents
8
Known data breaches
10
Attack type number
4

DoorDash

San Francisco, California, US
Last Update: 2025-12-11

At DoorDash, our mission to empower local economies shapes how our team members move quickly and always learn and reiterate to support merchants, Dashers and the communities we serve. We are a technology and logistics company that started with door-to-door delivery, and we are looking for team members who can help us go from a company that is known for delivering food to a company that people turn to for any and all goods. DoorDash is growing rapidly and changing constantly, which gives our team members the opportunity to share their unique perspectives, solve new challenges, and own their careers. Our leaders seek the truth and welcome big, hairy, audacious questions. We are grounded in our company values, and we make intentional decisions that are both logical and display empathy for our range of users—from Dashers to Merchants to Customers.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 74,124
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
9
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/meta.jpeg
Meta
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/doordash.jpeg
DoorDash
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
Meta
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
DoorDash
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Meta has 1303.51% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

DoorDash has 426.32% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Meta cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

DoorDash cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/meta.jpeg
Meta
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Unsafe deserialization of payloads
Motivation: Exploitation for remote code execution, potential data exfiltration, and botnet integration
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Contact Discovery Feature Abuse, Brute-Force Queries, Metadata Exploitation
Motivation: Data Harvesting, Targeted Phishing Preparation, Identity-Based Social Engineering, Fraud Enablement
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Fake Emails, Fake Websites, Spoofed URLs, AI-Generated Scam Sites
Motivation: Financial Gain, Identity Theft, Data Harvesting for Dark Web Sales
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/doordash.jpeg
DoorDash
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Third-Party Vendor Compromise, Credential Theft, Social Engineering
Motivation: Data Theft, Potential Fraud Enablement
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Social Engineering (Employee Targeted)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Social Engineering, Phishing (Spear Phishing/Vishing), Compromised Credentials
Motivation: Data Theft for Follow-on Attacks (e.g., Spear Phishing, Vishing), Potential Financial Gain via Stolen Data
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Meta company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to DoorDash company.

In the current year, Meta company has reported more cyber incidents than DoorDash company.

Neither DoorDash company nor Meta company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both DoorDash company and Meta company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Meta company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while DoorDash company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Meta company and DoorDash company have disclosed vulnerabilities.

Neither Meta nor DoorDash holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Meta company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to DoorDash company.

Meta company employs more people globally than DoorDash company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither Meta nor DoorDash holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Meta nor DoorDash holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Meta nor DoorDash holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Meta nor DoorDash holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Meta nor DoorDash holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Meta nor DoorDash holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N