Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

RedisRedis
VS
Just Eat Takeaway.comJust Eat Takeaway.com
Redis

Redis

700 E. El Camino Real, Suite 250, Mountain View, CA, US, 94041

Last Update: 08/06/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://redis.io
761/1000Fair

Redis is the world's fastest data platform. We provide cloud and on-prem solutions for caching, vector search, and more that seamlessly fit into any tech stack. With fast setup and fast support, we make it simple for digital customers to build, scale, and deploy the fas...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:1,510
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Just Eat Takeaway.com

Just Eat Takeaway.com

Piet Heinkade 61, Amsterdam, North Holland, NL, 1019 GM

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
769/1000Fair

Just Eat Take​away​.com is a lead­ing glob­al online deliv­ery mar­ket­place, con­nect­ing con­sumers and restau­rants through our plat­form in 16 coun­tries. Like a dinner table, working at JET brings our office employees and couriers together. From coding to customer...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:12,437
Subsidiaries:10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Redis

Redis

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Just Eat Takeaway.com

Just Eat Takeaway.com

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

Redis has 5.66% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Just Eat Takeaway.com in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Redis (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Redis cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Just Eat Takeaway.com (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Just Eat Takeaway.com cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Redis

Redis

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
RED1780914215
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
RED5093050100725
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
RED3893338100725
Just Eat Takeaway.com

Just Eat Takeaway.com

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Redis company and Just Eat Takeaway.com company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Redis and Just Eat Takeaway.com, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Redis and Just Eat Takeaway.com, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Redis or Just Eat Takeaway.com ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Redis or Just Eat Takeaway.com ?
Between Redis and Just Eat Takeaway.com, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Redis and Just Eat Takeaway.com, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9