Comparison Overview
Serasa Experian

Serasa Experian
Avenida das Nações Unidas, 14.401, São Paulo, 04794-000, BR
Last Update: 10/04/2026
Somos uma Datatech, líder global em soluções de inteligência para análise de riscos e oportunidades com foco nas jornadas de crédito, autenticação e prevenção à fraude. Temos presença global com expertise local, estamos em 30 países e atuamos há 55 anos no mercado bra...

Experian
475 Anton Blvd, Costa Mesa, CA, US, 92626
Last Update: 08/10/2026
Experian is a global data and technology company, powering opportunities for people and businesses around the world. We help to redefine lending practices, uncover and prevent fraud, simplify healthcare, deliver digital marketing solutions, and gain deeper insights into...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Serasa Experian







Experian






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Information Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Serasa Experian in 2026.
Incidents vs Information Services Industry Avg (This Year)
Experian has 98.02% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Serasa Experian (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Serasa Experian cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Experian (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Experian cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Serasa Experian

Experian
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
HTTP/2 servers could end up crashing due to inadvertently modifying its HPACK encoder concurrently. This happens because the server modifies the HPACK encoder from two goroutines without synchronization: one uses the encoder to encode a HEADERS frame as part of a response sent to a client and the other modifies the encoder's table size when handling a SETTINGS frame containing SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE that a client sends. A malicious client can repeatedly send a request while changing the header table size to crash the server.
Multiple ECH outer extension references are not permitted under RFC 9849; previously, a client could send a well-crafted packet that could trigger memory exhaustion in the server process by specifying multiple references. We now reject these as malformed and curb the memory amplification vector as a result.
A trusted template author may have previously written a valid template wherein the use of the 'yield' keyword would not be correctly escaped. We now ensure that valid keyword uses are escaped and non-keyword uses are not escaped.
Improper certificate validation in Microsoft Partner Center allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.
Authorization bypass through user-controlled key in Microsoft Bookings allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.