Comparison Overview

PyPI

VS

Red Hat

PyPI

None
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

The Python Package Index (PyPI) is a repository of software for the Python programming language

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 4
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Red Hat

100 E. Davie St., Raleigh, NC, US, 27601
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 650 and 699

Red Hat is the world’s leading provider of enterprise open source solutions, using a community-powered approach to deliver high-performing Linux, hybrid cloud, edge, and Kubernetes technologies. We hire creative, passionate people who are ready to contribute their ideas, help solve complex problems, and make an impact. Opportunities are open. Join us.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 19,569
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pypi.jpeg
PyPI
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/red-hat.jpeg
Red Hat
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
PyPI
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Red Hat
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PyPI in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Red Hat has 581.82% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

PyPI cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Red Hat (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Red Hat cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pypi.jpeg
PyPI
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/red-hat.jpeg
Red Hat
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Social Engineering (likely), Insider Threat (possible), Exploitation of Vulnerabilities (unconfirmed)
Motivation: Financial Gain, Notoriety, Data Theft for Extortion
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: compromised consulting repositories, stolen credentials/API keys, supply chain exploitation
Motivation: financial gain (extortion), strategic disruption, potential nation-state intelligence collection, weaponizing political timing
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Authenticated remote attacker exploiting improper permission assignments in OpenShift AI
Blog: Blog

FAQ

PyPI company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Red Hat company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Red Hat company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas PyPI company has not reported any.

In the current year, Red Hat company has reported more cyber incidents than PyPI company.

Neither Red Hat company nor PyPI company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Red Hat company has disclosed at least one data breach, while PyPI company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Red Hat company nor PyPI company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Red Hat company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while PyPI company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither PyPI nor Red Hat holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Red Hat company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to PyPI company.

Red Hat company employs more people globally than PyPI company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither PyPI nor Red Hat holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither PyPI nor Red Hat holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither PyPI nor Red Hat holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither PyPI nor Red Hat holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither PyPI nor Red Hat holds HIPAA certification.

Neither PyPI nor Red Hat holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ThingsBoard in versions prior to v4.2.1 allows an authenticated user to upload malicious SVG images via the "Image Gallery", leading to a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The exploit can be triggered when any user accesses the public API endpoint of the malicious SVG images, or if the malicious images are embedded in an `iframe` element, during a widget creation, deployed to any page of the platform (e.g., dashboards), and accessed during normal operations. The vulnerability resides in the `ImageController`, which fails to restrict the execution of JavaScript code when an image is loaded by the user's browser. This vulnerability can lead to the execution of malicious code in the context of other users' sessions, potentially compromising their accounts and allowing unauthorized actions.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/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
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to to verify that the token used during the code exchange originates from the same authentication flow, which allows an authenticated user to perform account takeover via a specially crafted email address used when switching authentication methods and sending a request to the /users/login/sso/code-exchange endpoint. The vulnerability requires ExperimentalEnableAuthenticationTransfer to be enabled (default: enabled) and RequireEmailVerification to be disabled (default: disabled).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to sanitize team email addresses to be visible only to Team Admins, which allows any authenticated user to view team email addresses via the GET /api/v4/channels/{channel_id}/common_teams endpoint

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Exposure of email service credentials to users without administrative rights in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Devolutions Server: before 2025.2.21, before 2025.3.9.

Description

Exposure of credentials in unintended requests in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Server: through 2025.2.20, through 2025.3.8.