Comparison Overview
Moody's

Moody's
7 World Trade Center, New York, NY, 10007, US
Last Update: 12/03/2026
In an era where risks are multiplying and increasingly interconnected, Moody’s helps organizations make sense of the complexities. By combining data, intelligence, and risk expertise with groundbreaking technologies and a seamless customer experience, we deliver relevan...

Fidelity Investments
245 Summer St, Boston, MA, US, 02210
Last Update: 19/05/2026
Fidelity’s mission is to strengthen the financial well-being of our customers and deliver better outcomes for the clients and businesses we serve. Fidelity’s strength comes from the scale of our diversified, market-leading financial services businesses that serve indivi...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Moody's







Fidelity Investments






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Moody's in 2026.
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
Fidelity Investments has 5.66% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Moody's (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Moody's cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Fidelity Investments (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Fidelity Investments cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Moody's

Fidelity Investments
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.