Comparison Overview
Pronto Project Management Software

Pronto Project Management Software
Level 2/4-12 Amsterdam Street, Richmond, Melbourne, Victoria, AU, 3000
Last Update: 04/03/2026
The way we work has changed. The world is moving faster. Teams are more distributed. Expectations are higher. AI is shifting how we plan, prioritise and deliver. But too often, information is scattered, visibility is limited, and decision-making lags behind. What’s mis...

Epic
1979 Milky Way, Verona, WI, US, 53593
Last Update: 02/04/2026
Join us in our mission to help the world get well, help the world stay well, and help future generations be healthier. We hire smart and motivated people from all academic majors to code, test, and implement healthcare software that hundreds of millions of patients and...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Pronto Project Management Software







Epic






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Pronto Project Management Software in 2026.
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Epic in 2026.
Incident History - Pronto Project Management Software (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Pronto Project Management Software cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Epic (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Epic cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Pronto Project Management Software

Epic
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.