Comparison Overview
Porsche Leipzig GmbH

Porsche Leipzig GmbH
Porschestraße 1, Leipzig, DE, 04158
Last Update: 21/01/2026
Porsche found a second home for itself at its Leipzig location more than ten years ago. Since the ground-breaking ceremony in the year 2000 we have continued the development of the Porsche story here. Since that time a great deal has been constructed and produced in Lei...

General Motors
100 Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan, US, 48243
Last Update: 15/06/2026
General Motors’ vision is to create a world with Zero Crashes, Zero Emissions and Zero Congestion, and we have committed ourselves to leading the way toward this future. Today, we are in the midst of a transportation revolution, and we have the ambition, the talent and ...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Porsche Leipzig GmbH







General Motors






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Porsche Leipzig GmbH in 2026.
Incidents vs Motor Vehicle Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
General Motors has 5.66% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Porsche Leipzig GmbH (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Porsche Leipzig GmbH cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - General Motors (X = Date, Y = Severity)
General Motors cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Porsche Leipzig GmbH

General Motors
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.