Comparison Overview
Ninja Van

Ninja Van
3 Kay Siang Road, Queenstown, Central Singapore Community Development Council, SG, 248923
Last Update: 14/02/2026
Ninja Van Group is a tech-enabled logistics organisation, backed by marquee investors including GeoPost, Alibaba Group, and B Capital Group. Launched in 2014 as an e-commerce express logistics company, it reached 100% network coverage by 2018 with over 2,000 stations ...

J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.
615 J.B Hunt Corporate Drive, Lowell, 72745, US
Last Update: 13/09/2026
J.B. Hunt specializes in freight shipping for customers of all sizes. Our mission is to drive long-term value for our people, customers and shareholders while staying focused on our vision to create the most efficient transportation network in North America. Our foundat...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Ninja Van







J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Truck Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Ninja Van in 2026.
Incidents vs Truck Transportation Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. in 2026.
Incident History - Ninja Van (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Ninja Van cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)
J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Ninja Van

J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
A security flaw has been discovered in THU-MIG yoloe up to 40cd606cabdbe2b566d6f14a6b162c89206e9a1b. This affects the function eval of the file ultralytics/nn/autobackend.py of the component AutoBackend Model Loading. The manipulation of the argument imgsz/names/kpt_shape results in improper neutralization of directives in dynamically evaluated code. The attack requires a local approach. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.
Coder before 2.34.7 contains an IP spoofing vulnerability in the ExtractRealIPAddress middleware that trusts the leftmost, client-supplied X-Forwarded-For value instead of the client IP appended by a reverse proxy. Attackers can send forged X-Forwarded-For values through appending proxies to bypass per-IP rate limits on login, one-time passcode, and password validation endpoints, enabling brute-force attacks, and to falsify IP addresses recorded in audit logs.
Coder before 2.29.17, 2.30.0 before 2.32.7, 2.33.0 before 2.33.8, and 2.34.0 before 2.34.2 contains a user enumeration vulnerability because userpassword.Compare() substitutes a placeholder hash derived from the string "hunter2" when a stored password hash is empty. Unauthenticated attackers can submit logins with the password "hunter2" and distinguish HTTP 403 from 401 responses to enumerate valid accounts and reveal the authentication provider of SSO-only users.
Coder before 2.29.17, 2.30.0 before 2.32.7, 2.33.0 before 2.33.8, and 2.34.0 before 2.34.2 contains a stored HTML injection vulnerability because the ApplicationName and LogoURL appearance settings are rendered into HTML output without sufficient escaping. Attackers with the Owner role can store HTML markup in these settings that renders in the Coder dashboard and in SMTP notification emails sent to other deployment users.
Coder from 2.0.0 before 2.34.8 contains an open redirect vulnerability in handleAPIKeySmuggling that allows attackers to redirect users externally via unsanitized r.URL.Path values. Attackers can craft links on trusted workspace app subdomains with paths beginning with double slashes, which become scheme-relative redirects to attacker sites for phishing.