Comparison Overview
Progress Telerik and Kendo UI

Progress Telerik and Kendo UI
14 Oak Park Drive, Bedford, MA, 01730, US
Last Update: 30/03/2026
What do we do? Where do we begin? We build feature-rich, make-your-dev-life-easier UI components for your favorite .NET & JavaScript frameworks. Components for web, mobile, desktop, cross-platform - run your app wherever you want to. Who are we to stop you, after all. ...

SAP
Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16, Walldorf, 69190, DE
Last Update: 13/06/2026
SAP is the leading enterprise application and business AI company. We stand at the intersection of business and technology, where our innovations are designed to directly address real business challenges and produce real-world impacts. Our solutions are the backbone fo...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Progress Telerik and Kendo UI







SAP






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Progress Telerik and Kendo UI in 2026.
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
SAP has 88.68% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Progress Telerik and Kendo UI (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Progress Telerik and Kendo UI cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - SAP (X = Date, Y = Severity)
SAP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Progress Telerik and Kendo UI

SAP
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.