Comparison Overview
Telstra International

Telstra International
242 Exhibition St, Melbourne, Victoria, AU, 3000
Last Update: 27/01/2026
Connections that matter. Telstra International is a leading global telecom and technology services company that’s dedicated to communication—and passionate about the quality of every connection. Our market-leading network covers PoPs at close to 200 countries and terr...

Deutsche Telekom
Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 140, Bonn, 53113, DE
Last Update: 01/10/2026
Welcome to Deutsche Telekom. As one of the world's most valuable brands, we design innovative solutions and products in the areas of connectivity, networks, digitalization and security. #connectingyourworld At Deutsche Telekom, we believe that each and every one of us...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Telstra International







Deutsche Telekom






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Telstra International in 2026.
Incidents vs Telecommunications Industry Avg (This Year)
Deutsche Telekom has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Telstra International (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Telstra International cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Deutsche Telekom (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Deutsche Telekom cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Telstra International

Deutsche Telekom
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.