Comparison Overview
Qatar Airways

Qatar Airways
Old Airport Rd., Doha, 22550, QA
Last Update: 04/04/2026
Qatar Airways is the national airline of the State of Qatar. Based in Doha, the Airline’s trendsetting on-board product focuses on: comfort, fine cuisine, the latest in-flight audio & video entertainment, award-winning service and one of the youngest and most advanced a...

British Airways
Harmondsworth, Middlesex, UB7 0GA, GB
Last Update: 15/05/2026
As a global airline and the UK’s flag carrier, British Airways has been flying its customers to where they need to be for more than 100 years. The airline connects Britain with the world and the world with Britain, operating one of the most extensive international sched...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Qatar Airways







British Airways






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

Qatar Airways

British Airways
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
phpMyFAQ before 4.1.5 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability in GroupController::updatePermissions that allows GROUP_EDIT administrators to grant arbitrary rights to groups without verifying they hold those rights themselves. A delegated administrator can exploit this by assigning high-value permissions to a group they belong to, inheriting those rights and escalating privileges up to full administrative control.
n8n before 2.25.7 and 2.26.x before 2.26.2 contains an abstract syntax tree (AST) security validator bypass in the Python Code node. An authenticated user with permission to create or modify workflows containing a Python Code node can bypass the validator and access the task executor module namespace. The issue only affects self-hosted instances where the Python Task Runner is enabled; where N8N_BLOCK_RUNNER_ENV_ACCESS is configured to allow it, this can disclose environment variables accessible to the task runner process.
Grav CMS before 2.0.0-beta.2 contains multiple code-execution vulnerabilities. Three unsafe unserialize() calls - in Scheduler\JobQueue, Framework\Cache\Adapter\FileCache, and Session - deserialize untrusted data without restricting allowed classes, enabling PHP object injection and, via a gadget chain, arbitrary code execution where an attacker controls the serialized input. Additionally, InstallCommand's git clone operation passes the branch, url, and path parameters into a shell command without escaping, allowing OS command injection via plugin/theme installation (which requires admin access). A Twig security blocklist bypass (server-side template injection) is also present. The issues are fixed in 2.0.0-beta.2.
Storage Concentrator (SC & SCVM) contains a command injection vulnerability within the debug.pl script that is reachable without authentication. A remote attacker can submit a specially crafted HTTP request containing a malicious payload that is processed without adequate input sanitization, resulting in arbitrary command execution with root-level privileges on the underlying system.
Storage Concentrator (SC & SCVM) contains a command injection vulnerability in the ms_service.pl service, which listens on TCP port 9000 by default and accepts custom network packets to perform device actions. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a specially crafted packet containing a malicious payload that is processed without adequate sanitization, resulting in arbitrary command execution with root-level privileges.