Comparison Overview
Toro Technology Center - India

Toro Technology Center - India
Baner Road, Pune, Maharashtra, 411 045, IN
Last Update: 08/12/2025
The Toro Company With roots dating back to 1914, The Toro Company was built on a tradition of quality and caring relationships. Today, the company is a leading worldwide provider of innovative solutions for the outdoor environment including turf and landscape maintenanc...

Avaya
350 Mount Kemble Ave, Morristown, 07960, US
Last Update: 13/09/2026
At Avaya, we give our customers the freedom to take their business in the directions that benefit them most. We provide the paths for both customers and their employees where every moment big and small can drive in the moment, memorable experiences. The journey is their...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Toro Technology Center - India







Avaya






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Toro Technology Center - India in 2026.
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Avaya in 2026.
Incident History - Toro Technology Center - India (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Toro Technology Center - India cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Avaya (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Avaya cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Toro Technology Center - India

Avaya
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.