Comparison Overview

ServiceNow

VS

Meituan

ServiceNow

2225 Lawson Lane, Santa Clara, CA, US, 95054
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 800 and 849

ServiceNow (NYSE: NOW) makes the world work better for everyone. Our cloud-based platform and solutions help digitize and unify organizations so that they can find smarter, faster, better ways to make work flow. So employees and customers can be more connected, more innovative, and more agile. And we can all create the future we imagine. The world works with ServiceNow. For more information, visit www.servicenow.com.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 30,443
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Meituan

Wangjing International R&D Park, No.6 Wangjing East Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, CN, 100102
Last Update: 2025-11-21

Adhering to the ‘Retail + Technology’ strategy, Meituan commits to its mission that 'We help people eat better, live better'. Since its establishment in March 2010, Meituan has advanced the digital upgrading of services and goods retail on both supply and demand sides. Together with our partners we provide quality services for consumers. On 20 September, 2018, Meituan was listed on the Main Board of the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong. Meituan has always put customers first, and continuously increased its R&D investment in new technologies. Meituan will join hands with all partners to fulfill our social responsibility and create more values for the society.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 38,959
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/servicenow.jpeg
ServiceNow
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/meituan.jpeg
Meituan
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
ServiceNow
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Meituan
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

ServiceNow has 127.27% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Meituan in 2025.

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

ServiceNow cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Meituan cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/servicenow.jpeg
ServiceNow
Incidents

Date Detected: 2/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Misconfigured or overly permissive ACLs
Motivation: Data Exfiltration
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/meituan.jpeg
Meituan
Incidents

Date Detected: 05/2018
Type:Data Leak
Motivation: Financial
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

ServiceNow and Meituan have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, ServiceNow company has reported more cyber incidents than Meituan company.

Neither Meituan company nor ServiceNow company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Meituan company nor ServiceNow company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Meituan company nor ServiceNow company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

ServiceNow company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Meituan company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither ServiceNow nor Meituan holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

ServiceNow company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Meituan company.

Meituan company employs more people globally than ServiceNow company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither ServiceNow nor Meituan holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither ServiceNow nor Meituan holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither ServiceNow nor Meituan holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither ServiceNow nor Meituan holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither ServiceNow nor Meituan holds HIPAA certification.

Neither ServiceNow nor Meituan holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H