Comparison Overview
Qantas

Qantas
10 Bourke Road, Mascot, 2020, AU
Last Update: 20/05/2026
We would like to acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of the local lands and waterways on which we live, work and fly. We pay our respects to Elders past and present. Spirit is everything to us, and joining the Qantas team means bringing your spirit to ours. We have...

Cathay Pacific
Cathay City, 8 Scenic Road, Chek Lap Kok, HK
Last Update: 20/05/2026
Welcome to the official Cathay Pacific LinkedIn page. We have over 200 destinations in our global network, but want to do more than just move you from A to B. We want to take you further in your journey, and ultimately, to move beyond. And we’re here to do what we can t...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Qantas







Cathay Pacific






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Qantas in 2026.
Incidents vs Airlines and Aviation Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Cathay Pacific in 2026.
Incident History - Qantas (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Qantas cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Cathay Pacific (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Cathay Pacific cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Qantas

Cathay Pacific
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.