Comparison Overview
PING AN

PING AN
No. 5033 Yitian Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, 518046, CN
Last Update: 27/05/2026
This is the official Company Page of Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd. (HKEx: 2318; SSE: 601318; ADR: PNGAY). Ping An strives to become a world leading technology-powered financial services group. We believe the way people receive financial services an...

Broadridge
605 3rd Ave, 41st Floor, New York, New York, US, 10158
Last Update: 01/04/2026
Broadridge Financial Solutions (NYSE: BR) is a global technology leader with the trusted expertise and transformative technology to help clients and the financial services industry operate, innovate, and grow. We power investing, governance, and communications for our c...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

PING AN







Broadridge






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for PING AN in 2026.
Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Broadridge in 2026.
Incident History - PING AN (X = Date, Y = Severity)
PING AN cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Broadridge (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Broadridge cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

PING AN

Broadridge
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.