Comparison Overview

OnlyFans

VS

Walt Disney World

OnlyFans

London, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-23
Between 650 and 699

OnlyFans empowers creators to own their full potential. OnlyFans is a place for creators from all genres and is committed to building the most inclusive and safest social media platform in the world. OnlyFans is a space for creators to express themselves freely, monetize content, and develop authentic connections with their fans. We continue to put power into the hands of creators by developing unparalleled opportunities for our community.

NAICS: 71
NAICS Definition: Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Employees: 5,158
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Walt Disney World

Post Office Box 10000, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, 32830, US
Last Update: 2025-12-25

The Walt Disney World® Resort features four theme parks — the Magic Kingdom® Park, Epcot®, Disney's Hollywood Studios™, and Disney's Animal Kingdom® Theme Park. More than 20 resort hotels are on-site, offering several thousand rooms of themed accommodations. The nearly 40-square-miles of the Walt Disney World® Resort also feature two water parks, Disney's Blizzard Beach Water Park and Disney's Typhoon Lagoon Water Park; Disney Springs, a daytime and nighttime shopping and entertainment complex; two full-service spas; and recreational facilities including championship golf courses and a 200-acre sports complex. Complete convention and banquet events, from conferences to weddings, are tailored for business and leisure groups. In addition, off-site vacation destinations include Disney's Hilton Head Island Resort and Disney's Vero Beach Resort. Walt Disney World Resort is the largest single-site employer in the United States, employing over 80,000 cast members to bring the magic to life.

NAICS: 71
NAICS Definition: Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Employees: 25,777
Subsidiaries: 57
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
7
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/onlyfans.jpeg
OnlyFans
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/walt-disney-world.jpeg
Walt Disney World
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
OnlyFans
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Walt Disney World
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Entertainment Providers Industry Average (This Year)

OnlyFans has 5.26% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Entertainment Providers Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Walt Disney World in 2025.

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

OnlyFans cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Walt Disney World (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Walt Disney World cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/onlyfans.jpeg
OnlyFans
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Third-party analytics vendor (supply chain attack)
Motivation: Extortion, data monetization on dark web
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/walt-disney-world.jpeg
Walt Disney World
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Phishing, Malware
Motivation: Data exfiltration, Financial gain, Public disclosure
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 2/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Malicious AI tool installation
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Walt Disney World company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to OnlyFans company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Walt Disney World company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to OnlyFans company.

In the current year, Walt Disney World company has reported more cyber incidents than OnlyFans company.

Walt Disney World company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while OnlyFans company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Walt Disney World company and OnlyFans company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither Walt Disney World company nor OnlyFans company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither OnlyFans company nor Walt Disney World company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither OnlyFans nor Walt Disney World holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Walt Disney World company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to OnlyFans company.

Walt Disney World company employs more people globally than OnlyFans company, reflecting its scale as a Entertainment Providers.

Neither OnlyFans nor Walt Disney World holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither OnlyFans nor Walt Disney World holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither OnlyFans nor Walt Disney World holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither OnlyFans nor Walt Disney World holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither OnlyFans nor Walt Disney World holds HIPAA certification.

Neither OnlyFans nor Walt Disney World 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