Comparison Overview

Ultralytics

VS

Bolt

Ultralytics

undefined, Frederick, Maryland, 21703, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 700 and 749

Ultralytics is on a mission to empower people and companies to unleash the positive potential of AI. We make model development accessible, efficient to train, and easy to deploy. It’s been a remarkable journey, but we’re just getting started. Bring your models to life with our vision AI tools: 🔘 Ultralytics HUB - Create and train sophisticated models in seconds with no code for web and mobile 🔘 Ultralytics YOLO - Explore our state-of-the-art AI architecture to train and deploy your highly accurate AI models like a pro

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 36
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Bolt

Tallinn, EE
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

At Bolt, we're building a future where people don’t need to own personal cars to move around safely and conveniently. A future where people have the freedom to use transport on demand, choosing whatever vehicle's best for each occasion — be it a car, scooter, or e-bike. We're helping over 200 million customers move around in more than 600 cities globally while also supporting more than 4.5 million drivers and couriers to earn a living. The best bit? We're only just getting started. Read more at bolt.eu

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 13,687
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ultralytics.jpeg
Ultralytics
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/bolt-eu.jpeg
Bolt
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
Ultralytics
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Bolt
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ultralytics in 2025.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bolt in 2025.

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

Ultralytics cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Bolt cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ultralytics.jpeg
Ultralytics
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: AI Model Hijacking
Motivation: Financial
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Malicious Software Update
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bolt-eu.jpeg
Bolt
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Ultralytics company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Bolt company has not reported any.

In the current year, Bolt company and Ultralytics company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Bolt company nor Ultralytics company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Bolt company nor Ultralytics company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Ultralytics company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Bolt company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Ultralytics company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Bolt company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Ultralytics nor Bolt holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Ultralytics company nor Bolt company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Bolt company employs more people globally than Ultralytics company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither Ultralytics nor Bolt holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ultralytics nor Bolt holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ultralytics nor Bolt holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ultralytics nor Bolt holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ultralytics nor Bolt holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ultralytics nor Bolt holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Sigstore Timestamp Authority is a service for issuing RFC 3161 timestamps. Prior to 2.0.3, Function api.ParseJSONRequest currently splits (via a call to strings.Split) an optionally-provided OID (which is untrusted data) on periods. Similarly, function api.getContentType splits the Content-Type header (which is also untrusted data) on an application string. As a result, in the face of a malicious request with either an excessively long OID in the payload containing many period characters or a malformed Content-Type header, a call to api.ParseJSONRequest or api.getContentType incurs allocations of O(n) bytes (where n stands for the length of the function's argument). This vulnerability is fixed in 2.0.3.

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

Monkeytype is a minimalistic and customizable typing test. In 25.49.0 and earlier, there is improper handling of user input which allows an attacker to execute malicious javascript on anyone viewing a malicious quote submission. quote.text and quote.source are user input, and they're inserted straight into the DOM. If they contain HTML tags, they will be rendered (after some escaping using quotes and textarea tags).

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/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

SysReptor is a fully customizable pentest reporting platform. Prior to 2025.102, there is a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability allows authenticated users to execute malicious JavaScript in the context of other logged-in users by uploading malicious JavaScript files in the web UI. This vulnerability is fixed in 2025.102.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Taiko Alethia is an Ethereum-equivalent, permissionless, based rollup designed to scale Ethereum without compromising its fundamental properties. In 2.3.1 and earlier, TaikoInbox._verifyBatches (packages/protocol/contracts/layer1/based/TaikoInbox.sol:627-678) advanced the local tid to whatever transition matched the current blockHash before knowing whether that batch would actually be verified. When the loop later broke (e.g., cooldown window not yet passed or transition invalidated), the function still wrote that newer tid into batches[lastVerifiedBatchId].verifiedTransitionId after decrementing batchId. Result: the last verified batch could end up pointing at a transition index from the next batch (often zeroed), corrupting the verified chain pointer.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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

A flaw has been found in youlaitech youlai-mall 1.0.0/2.0.0. Affected is the function getById/updateAddress/deleteAddress of the file /mall-ums/app-api/v1/addresses/. Executing manipulation can lead to improper control of dynamically-identified variables. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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