Comparison Overview

OpsRamp

VS

Agoda

OpsRamp

2590 N 1st St, San Jose, California, 95131, US
Last Update: 2025-03-04 (UTC)
Between 800 and 900

Strong

OpsRamp, A Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company Headquartered in Silicon Valley, with offices located worldwide, OpsRamp is a modern SaaS platform company thatโ€™s just entered its next stage of growth with new investment from Morgan Stanley, HPE and Sapphire Ventures. Weโ€™re disrupting the $28 billion-dollar market of IT operations management, fundamentally changing how IT teams support the business through infrastructure management. As one of Forbesโ€™ Top Cloud Computing Companies to Work For, weโ€™re working to upend the old way of discovering, monitoring, managing, and automating IT infrastructure with tomorrowโ€™s innovations like artificial intelligence, cloud capabilities, and more. Weโ€™re building the best team of innovators, thinkers, and doers in technology to realize the future of digital operations and bring it to life. Are you ready to join the future of IT operations? Follow us on Twitter https://twitter.com/OpsRamp Follow us on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/OpsRampHQ/

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 175
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Agoda

20 Cecil Street, #1401, Singapore, Singapore, 049705, SG
Last Update: 2025-05-06 (UTC)

Strong

Between 800 and 900

At Agoda, we bridge the world through travel. We aim to make it easy and rewarding for more travelers to explore and experience the amazing world we live in. We do so by enabling more people to see the world for less โ€“ with our best-value deals across our 4,700,000+ hotels and holiday properties, 130,000+ flight routes, 300,000+ activities, and more. Agoda was founded in 2005 in Thailand by two lifelong friends with a shared passion for travel. Today, Agoda is part of Booking Holdings [BKNG], and we have more than 7,000 employees from 90 nationalities in offices across Asia Pacific, the Middle East, Europe, and the Americas. In every department โ€“ from engineering to customer support โ€“ youโ€™ll find that data and technology are at the heart of our culture. Thereโ€™s never a boring day at Agoda as we aim to make travel hassle-free for everyone. If youโ€™re ready to begin your best journey with us and help us build travel for the world, join us. For properties seeking partnership with Agoda, visit https://connect.agoda.com

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 14,577
Subsidiaries: 11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/opsramp.jpeg
OpsRamp
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/agoda.jpeg
Agoda
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
OpsRamp
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Agoda
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for OpsRamp in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Agoda in 2025.

Incident History โ€” OpsRamp (X = Date, Y = Severity)

OpsRamp cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Agoda (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Agoda cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/opsramp.jpeg
OpsRamp
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/agoda.jpeg
Agoda
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Mass-phishing, Infostealer trojans
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Both OpsRamp company and Agoda company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Agoda company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas OpsRamp company has not reported any.

In the current year, Agoda company has reported more cyber incidents than OpsRamp company.

Neither Agoda company nor OpsRamp company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Agoda company nor OpsRamp company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Agoda company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while OpsRamp company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither OpsRamp company nor Agoda company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Agoda company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to OpsRamp company.

Agoda company employs more people globally than OpsRamp company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A vulnerability was found in LaChatterie Verger up to 1.2.10. This impacts the function redirectToAuthorization of the file /src/main/services/mcp/oauth/provider.ts. The manipulation of the argument URL results in deserialization. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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

A vulnerability has been found in SeriaWei ZKEACMS up to 4.3. This affects the function Delete of the file src/ZKEACMS.Redirection/Controllers/UrlRedirectionController.cs of the component POST Request Handler. The manipulation leads to improper authorization. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/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

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: jfs: fix invalid free of JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap in diUnmount syzbot found an invalid-free in diUnmount: BUG: KASAN: double-free in slab_free mm/slub.c:3661 [inline] BUG: KASAN: double-free in __kmem_cache_free+0x71/0x110 mm/slub.c:3674 Free of addr ffff88806f410000 by task syz-executor131/3632 CPU: 0 PID: 3632 Comm: syz-executor131 Not tainted 6.1.0-rc7-syzkaller-00012-gca57f02295f1 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/26/2022 Call Trace: <TASK> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:88 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x1b1/0x28e lib/dump_stack.c:106 print_address_description+0x74/0x340 mm/kasan/report.c:284 print_report+0x107/0x1f0 mm/kasan/report.c:395 kasan_report_invalid_free+0xac/0xd0 mm/kasan/report.c:460 ____kasan_slab_free+0xfb/0x120 kasan_slab_free include/linux/kasan.h:177 [inline] slab_free_hook mm/slub.c:1724 [inline] slab_free_freelist_hook+0x12e/0x1a0 mm/slub.c:1750 slab_free mm/slub.c:3661 [inline] __kmem_cache_free+0x71/0x110 mm/slub.c:3674 diUnmount+0xef/0x100 fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c:195 jfs_umount+0x108/0x370 fs/jfs/jfs_umount.c:63 jfs_put_super+0x86/0x190 fs/jfs/super.c:194 generic_shutdown_super+0x130/0x310 fs/super.c:492 kill_block_super+0x79/0xd0 fs/super.c:1428 deactivate_locked_super+0xa7/0xf0 fs/super.c:332 cleanup_mnt+0x494/0x520 fs/namespace.c:1186 task_work_run+0x243/0x300 kernel/task_work.c:179 exit_task_work include/linux/task_work.h:38 [inline] do_exit+0x664/0x2070 kernel/exit.c:820 do_group_exit+0x1fd/0x2b0 kernel/exit.c:950 __do_sys_exit_group kernel/exit.c:961 [inline] __se_sys_exit_group kernel/exit.c:959 [inline] __x64_sys_exit_group+0x3b/0x40 kernel/exit.c:959 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x3d/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd [...] JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap is not setting to NULL after free in diUnmount. If jfs_remount() free JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap but then failed at diMount(). JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap will be freed once again. Fix this problem by setting JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap to NULL after free.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: qla2xxx: Fix deletion race condition System crash when using debug kernel due to link list corruption. The cause of the link list corruption is due to session deletion was allowed to queue up twice. Here's the internal trace that show the same port was allowed to double queue for deletion on different cpu. 20808683956 015 qla2xxx [0000:13:00.1]-e801:4: Scheduling sess ffff93ebf9306800 for deletion 50:06:0e:80:12:48:ff:50 fc4_type 1 20808683957 027 qla2xxx [0000:13:00.1]-e801:4: Scheduling sess ffff93ebf9306800 for deletion 50:06:0e:80:12:48:ff:50 fc4_type 1 Move the clearing/setting of deleted flag lock.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/ksm: fix race with VMA iteration and mm_struct teardown exit_mmap() will tear down the VMAs and maple tree with the mmap_lock held in write mode. Ensure that the maple tree is still valid by checking ksm_test_exit() after taking the mmap_lock in read mode, but before the for_each_vma() iterator dereferences a destroyed maple tree. Since the maple tree is destroyed, the flags telling lockdep to check an external lock has been cleared. Skip the for_each_vma() iterator to avoid dereferencing a maple tree without the external lock flag, which would create a lockdep warning.