Comparison Overview

Positive Technologies

VS

NetEase

Positive Technologies

None
Last Update: 2026-01-23
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://global.ptsecurity.com/en/?utm_source=linkedin&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=main&utm_content=bio&utm_term=global

Positive Technologies is a leading developer of products, solutions and services for result-driven cybersecurity that enable detection and prevention of attacks before they cause unacceptable damage to businesses and entire economic sectors. The company's technology portfolio covers most categories of information security tools and continues to expand. We create meta-products — a new generation of tools for achieving effective cybersecurity with minimal human involvement. For over 20 years, we've been creating and implementing technologies that demonstrate real results in cybersecurity and radically improve our clients' security levels.

NAICS: 513
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 711
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
View Profile

NetEase

No.599 Wangshang Road, Binjiang District, Hangzhou, 310052, CN
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 800 and 849
https://ir.netease.com/

As a leading internet technology company based in China, NetEase, Inc. (NASDAQ: NTES and HKEX:9999, "NetEase") provides premium online services centered around content creation. With extensive offerings across its expanding gaming ecosystem, NetEase develops and operates some of China's most popular and longest running mobile and PC games. Powered by industry-leading inhouse R&D capabilities in China and globally, NetEase creates superior gaming experiences, inspires players and passionately delivers value for its thriving community worldwide. Beyond games, NetEase service offerings include its majority-controlled subsidiaries Youdao (NYSE:DAO), China's leading technology-focused intelligent learning company, and Cloud Music (HKEX:9899), China's leading online music content community, as well as Yanxuan, NetEase's private label consumer lifestyle brand.

NAICS: 513
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 11,962
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/positivetechnologies.jpeg
Positive Technologies
—
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/netease.jpeg
NetEase
—
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
Positive Technologies
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
NetEase
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 Positive Technologies in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for NetEase in 2026.

Incident History — Positive Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Positive Technologies cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

NetEase cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/positivetechnologies.jpeg
Positive Technologies
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2023
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Phishing emails
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/netease.jpeg
NetEase
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

NetEase company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Positive Technologies company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Positive Technologies company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas NetEase company has not reported any.

In the current year, NetEase company and Positive Technologies company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither NetEase company nor Positive Technologies company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither NetEase company nor Positive Technologies company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Positive Technologies company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while NetEase company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Positive Technologies company nor NetEase company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Positive Technologies nor NetEase holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

NetEase company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Positive Technologies company.

NetEase company employs more people globally than Positive Technologies company, reflecting its scale as a Technology, Information and Internet.

Neither Positive Technologies nor NetEase holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Positive Technologies nor NetEase holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Positive Technologies nor NetEase holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Positive Technologies nor NetEase holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Positive Technologies nor NetEase holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Positive Technologies nor NetEase holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper validation of specified type of input in M365 Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
References
Description

Moonraker is a Python web server providing API access to Klipper 3D printing firmware. In versions 0.9.3 and below, instances configured with the "ldap" component enabled are vulnerable to LDAP search filter injection techniques via the login endpoint. The 401 error response message can be used to determine whether or not a search was successful, allowing for brute force methods to discover LDAP entries on the server such as user IDs and user attributes. This issue has been fixed in version 0.10.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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
References
Description

Runtipi is a Docker-based, personal homeserver orchestrator that facilitates multiple services on a single server. Versions 3.7.0 and above allow an authenticated user to execute arbitrary system commands on the host server by injecting shell metacharacters into backup filenames. The BackupManager fails to sanitize the filenames of uploaded backups. The system persists user-uploaded files directly to the host filesystem using the raw originalname provided in the request. This allows an attacker to stage a file containing shell metacharacters (e.g., $(id).tar.gz) at a predictable path, which is later referenced during the restore process. The successful storage of the file is what allows the subsequent restore command to reference and execute it. This issue has been fixed in version 4.7.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References