Comparison Overview

Node.js

VS

LinkedIn

Node.js

1 Letterman Drive, San Francisco, CA, US, 94129
Last Update: 2025-12-25
Between 750 and 799

Node.js is a JavaScript runtime, used worldwide by millions.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 535
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

LinkedIn

1000 W Maude, None, Sunnyvale, CA, US, 94085
Last Update: 2025-12-25
Between 800 and 849

Founded in 2003, LinkedIn connects the world's professionals to make them more productive and successful. With more than 1 billion members worldwide, including executives from every Fortune 500 company, LinkedIn is the world's largest professional network. The company has a diversified business model with revenue coming from Talent Solutions, Marketing Solutions, Sales Solutions and Premium Subscriptions products. Headquartered in Silicon Valley, LinkedIn has offices across the globe..

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 23,853
Subsidiaries: 34
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/node-js.jpeg
Node.js
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/linkedin.jpeg
LinkedIn
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
Node.js
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
LinkedIn
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Node.js has 63.93% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LinkedIn in 2025.

Incident History — Node.js (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Node.js cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

LinkedIn cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/node-js.jpeg
Node.js
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: CI/CD Pipeline
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/linkedin.jpeg
LinkedIn
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2016
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2016
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Network Intrusion
Motivation: Data Theft
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2012
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

LinkedIn company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Node.js company.

In the current year, Node.js company has reported more cyber incidents than LinkedIn company.

Neither LinkedIn company nor Node.js company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

LinkedIn company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Node.js company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither LinkedIn company nor Node.js company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Node.js company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while LinkedIn company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Node.js nor LinkedIn holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

LinkedIn company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Node.js company.

LinkedIn company employs more people globally than Node.js company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither Node.js nor LinkedIn holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Node.js nor LinkedIn holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Node.js nor LinkedIn holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Node.js nor LinkedIn holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Node.js nor LinkedIn holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Node.js nor LinkedIn holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Prior to version 2.0.0, in self-hosted n8n instances where the Code node runs in legacy (non-task-runner) JavaScript execution mode, authenticated users with workflow editing access can invoke internal helper functions from within the Code node. This allows a workflow editor to perform actions on the n8n host with the same privileges as the n8n process, including: reading files from the host filesystem (subject to any file-access restrictions configured on the instance and OS/container permissions), and writing files to the host filesystem (subject to the same restrictions). This issue has been patched in version 2.0.0. Workarounds for this issue involve limiting file operations by setting N8N_RESTRICT_FILE_ACCESS_TO to a dedicated directory (e.g., ~/.n8n-files) and ensure it contains no sensitive data, keeping N8N_BLOCK_FILE_ACCESS_TO_N8N_FILES=true (default) to block access to .n8n and user-defined config files, and disabling high-risk nodes (including the Code node) using NODES_EXCLUDE if workflow editors are not fully trusted.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. From version 1.0.0 to before 2.0.0, a sandbox bypass vulnerability exists in the Python Code Node that uses Pyodide. An authenticated user with permission to create or modify workflows can exploit this vulnerability to execute arbitrary commands on the host system running n8n, using the same privileges as the n8n process. This issue has been patched in version 2.0.0. Workarounds for this issue involve disabling the Code Node by setting the environment variable NODES_EXCLUDE: "[\"n8n-nodes-base.code\"]", disabling Python support in the Code node by setting the environment variable N8N_PYTHON_ENABLED=false, which was introduced in n8n version 1.104.0, and configuring n8n to use the task runner based Python sandbox via the N8N_RUNNERS_ENABLED and N8N_NATIVE_PYTHON_RUNNER environment variables.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

LMDeploy is a toolkit for compressing, deploying, and serving LLMs. Prior to version 0.11.1, an insecure deserialization vulnerability exists in lmdeploy where torch.load() is called without the weights_only=True parameter when loading model checkpoint files. This allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code on the victim's machine when they load a malicious .bin or .pt model file. This issue has been patched in version 0.11.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Prior to version 1.114.0, a stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability may occur in n8n when using the “Respond to Webhook” node. When this node responds with HTML content containing executable scripts, the payload may execute directly in the top-level window, rather than within the expected sandbox introduced in version 1.103.0. This behavior can enable a malicious actor with workflow creation permissions to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the context of the n8n editor interface. This issue has been patched in version 1.114.0. Workarounds for this issue involve restricting workflow creation and modification privileges to trusted users only, avoiding use of untrusted HTML responses in the “Respond to Webhook” node, and using an external reverse proxy or HTML sanitizer to filter responses that include executable scripts.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Yealink T21P_E2 Phone 52.84.0.15 is vulnerable to Directory Traversal. A remote normal privileged attacker can read arbitrary files via a crafted request result read function of the diagnostic component.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N