Comparison Overview
Panda Restaurant Group

Panda Restaurant Group
1683 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, 91770, US
Last Update: 01/04/2026
Panda Restaurant Group is the global leader in Asian dining and includes Panda Express, Panda Inn, and more. Founded in 1973 by Andrew and Peggy Cherng, we are a family-owned business with more than 2,600 restaurants worldwide. Our mission is to deliver exceptional Asia...

Papa Johns
788 Circle 75 Pkwy SE, Atlanta, Georgia, US, 30339
Last Update: 01/04/2026
Papa Johns seeks people who have an entrepreneurial spirit and share our philosophy for success. Hands-on training, a clean and safe work environment, quality business practices, advancement opportunities and meaningful work combine to produce not only the best pizza, b...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Panda Restaurant Group







Papa Johns






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Panda Restaurant Group in 2026.
Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Papa Johns in 2026.
Incident History - Panda Restaurant Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Panda Restaurant Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Papa Johns (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Papa Johns cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Panda Restaurant Group

Papa Johns
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains a path traversal vulnerability in MultiAgentMonitor that fails to sanitize agent IDs when building file paths. Attackers can include traversal sequences like ../ in agent IDs to read, write, or overwrite arbitrary files, enabling sensitive disclosure, denial of service, or code execution.
PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MultiAgentLedger component that allows attackers to access sensitive data by registering agents with duplicate IDs. Attackers can exploit the lack of agent ID uniqueness enforcement to share ledger instances and expose system prompts and conversation history between agents.
PraisonAI before 1.5.128 contains a cross-origin agent execution vulnerability in the AGUI endpoint that allows remote attackers to trigger arbitrary agent execution. The POST /agui endpoint lacks authentication and hardcodes Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * headers, combined with Starlette's Content-Type-agnostic JSON parsing, enabling attackers to bypass CORS preflight checks via simple requests and exfiltrate sensitive agent responses including tool execution results and environment data.
PraisonAI before 4.5.128 contains an arbitrary shell command execution vulnerability where the UI modules hardcode approval_mode to auto, overriding administrator configuration from PRAISON_APPROVAL_MODE environment variable. Authenticated attackers can instruct the LLM agent to execute arbitrary shell commands via subprocess.run with shell=True, bypassing the manual approval gate and insufficient command sanitization blocklists.
PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.