Comparison Overview

OYO

VS

Arrow Electronics

OYO

9th Floor, Spaze Palazo,Sourthern Peripheral Road Sector-69, Gurugram, 122001, IN
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 800 and 849

OYO is a global platform that aims to empower entrepreneurs and small businesses with hotels and homes by providing full-stack technology products and services that aims to increase revenue and ease operations; bringing easy-to-book, affordable, and trusted accommodation to customers around the world. OYO offers 40+ integrated products and solutions to patrons who operate over 157K hotel and home storefronts in more than 35 countries including India, Europe, and Southeast Asia. OYO was founded by 27-year-old Ritesh Agarwal, the first Asian resident to be accepted to the Thiel Fellowship (started by Paypal founder Peter Thiel). OYO operates a unique business model that helps its patrons transform fragmented, unbranded and underutilized hospitality assets into branded, digitally-enabled storefronts with higher revenue generation potential and provides its customers with access to a broad range of high-quality storefronts at compelling price points. Owners and operators of over 157K storefronts use the OYO platform to manage all mission-critical aspects of their business operations. OYO’s comprehensive, full-stack technology suite integrates more than 40 products and services across digital sign-up and onboarding, revenue management, daily business management and D2C stacks into two flagship patron applications, Co-OYO and OYO OS. OYO customers can book storefronts through OYO’s own D2C channels and through indirect channels with third-party OTAs. The OYO App offers a variety of digital tools to guide customers throughout their journey, including discovery, seamless booking, pre-stay assistance, cancellations, digital check-ins as well as in-stay and post-stay services. With over 100 mn downloads, the OYO App was the 3rd most downloaded travel app in 2020. OYO Wizard, OYO’s loyalty program, has 9.2 million members and is the second largest loyalty program run by a travel or food brand in India, by subscriber base.

NAICS: 513
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 15,342
Subsidiaries: 17
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Arrow Electronics

9201 East Dry Creek Road, Centennial, 80112, US
Last Update: 2026-01-18

Arrow Electronics (NYSE:ARW) guides innovation forward for thousands of leading technology manufacturers and service providers. With 2024 sales of $27.9 billion, Arrow develops technology solutions that help improve business and daily life. Our broad portfolio that spans the entire technology landscape, helps customers design, distribute and deploy forward-thinking products that make the benefits of technology accessible to as many people as possible. Learn more at arrow.com. Are you thinking Five Years Out? Join us at careers.arrow.com.

NAICS: 513
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 21,599
Subsidiaries: 50
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/oyo-rooms.jpeg
OYO
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/arrow-electronics.jpeg
Arrow Electronics
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
OYO
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Arrow Electronics
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for OYO in 2026.

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Arrow Electronics in 2026.

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

OYO cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Arrow Electronics (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Arrow Electronics cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/oyo-rooms.jpeg
OYO
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/arrow-electronics.jpeg
Arrow Electronics
Incidents

Date Detected: 2/2010
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Physical Theft
Motivation: Unknown
Blog: Blog

FAQ

OYO company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Arrow Electronics company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Arrow Electronics company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas OYO company has not reported any.

In the current year, Arrow Electronics company and OYO company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Arrow Electronics company nor OYO company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Arrow Electronics company has disclosed at least one data breach, while OYO company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Arrow Electronics company nor OYO company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither OYO company nor Arrow Electronics company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither OYO nor Arrow Electronics holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Arrow Electronics company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to OYO company.

Arrow Electronics company employs more people globally than OYO company, reflecting its scale as a Technology, Information and Internet.

Neither OYO nor Arrow Electronics holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither OYO nor Arrow Electronics holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither OYO nor Arrow Electronics holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither OYO nor Arrow Electronics holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither OYO nor Arrow Electronics holds HIPAA certification.

Neither OYO nor Arrow Electronics holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

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

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N