Comparison Overview
hampr

hampr
314 Jefferson St, Lafayette, 70501, US
Last Update: 02/06/2026
What if we said you never again have to worry about forgetting to switch your laundry from the washer to the dryer — or spend one second more of your precious free time folding that seemingly endless pile of clean clothes? Yeah, you heard us—never again. It’s time to ...

HelloFresh
Prinzenstraße 89, Berlin, 10969, DE
Last Update: 14/09/2026
HelloFresh is on a mission to change the way people eat, forever! From our 2011 founding in Europe’s vibrant tech hub Berlin, we’re evolving from the world’s leading meal kit company to the world's leading food solutions group. We delivered 243.3 million meals and reac...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

hampr







HelloFresh






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Consumer Services Industry Avg (This Year)
hampr has 21.26% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Consumer Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for HelloFresh in 2026.
Incident History - hampr (X = Date, Y = Severity)
hampr cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - HelloFresh (X = Date, Y = Severity)
HelloFresh cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

hampr

HelloFresh
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.