Comparison Overview

WDEF-TV

VS

Fox Corporation

WDEF-TV

3300 Broad Street, None, Chattanooga,, TN, US, 37408
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 650 and 699

WDEF–TV, channel 12, is the CBS affiliate television station for Chattanooga and the Tennessee Valley. The station, whose call letters came from its former AM and FM sister stations, is owned by Morris Multimedia. Its studios are located on Broad Street in Chattanooga, while its transmitter is located in nearby Signal Mountain. On cable, WDEF-TV is carried on Comcast channel 13, and on EPB Fiber Optics channels 12 and 312 in the Chattanooga area. Syndicated programming on WDEF includes: Judge Judy, The Insider, and The Andy Griffith Show.

NAICS: 515
NAICS Definition: Broadcasting (except Internet)
Employees: 72
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Fox Corporation

New York, New York, US, 10036
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Under the FOX banner, we produce and distribute content through some of the world’s leading and most valued brands, including: FOX News Media, FOX Sports, FOX Entertainment, FOX Television Stations and Tubi Media Group. We empower a diverse range of creators to imagine and develop culturally significant content, while building an organization that thrives on creative ideas, operational expertise and strategic thinking. We have long been a leader in news, sports and entertainment programming, achieving strong revenue growth and profitability in a complex industry environment over the past several years. FOX will continue to invest across our businesses, allocate resources toward investments in higher growth initiatives and take advantage of strategic opportunities, including potential acquisitions across the range of the media categories in which we operate.

NAICS: 515
NAICS Definition: Broadcasting (except Internet)
Employees: 12,627
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/wdef-tv.jpeg
WDEF-TV
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/fox-corporation.jpeg
Fox Corporation
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
WDEF-TV
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Fox Corporation
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Broadcast Media Production and Distribution Industry Average (This Year)

WDEF-TV has 0.0% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Broadcast Media Production and Distribution Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Fox Corporation in 2025.

Incident History — WDEF-TV (X = Date, Y = Severity)

WDEF-TV cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Fox Corporation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fox Corporation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/wdef-tv.jpeg
WDEF-TV
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Ransomware-as-a-service
Motivation: Extortion, Financial Gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fox-corporation.jpeg
Fox Corporation
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Fox Corporation company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to WDEF-TV company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

WDEF-TV company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Fox Corporation company has not reported any.

In the current year, WDEF-TV company has reported more cyber incidents than Fox Corporation company.

WDEF-TV company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Fox Corporation company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Fox Corporation company nor WDEF-TV company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Fox Corporation company nor WDEF-TV company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither WDEF-TV company nor Fox Corporation company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither WDEF-TV nor Fox Corporation holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Fox Corporation company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to WDEF-TV company.

Fox Corporation company employs more people globally than WDEF-TV company, reflecting its scale as a Broadcast Media Production and Distribution.

Neither WDEF-TV nor Fox Corporation holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither WDEF-TV nor Fox Corporation holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither WDEF-TV nor Fox Corporation holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither WDEF-TV nor Fox Corporation holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither WDEF-TV nor Fox Corporation holds HIPAA certification.

Neither WDEF-TV nor Fox Corporation holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A vulnerability was determined in motogadget mo.lock Ignition Lock up to 20251125. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the component NFC Handler. Executing manipulation can lead to use of hard-coded cryptographic key . The physical device can be targeted for the attack. A high complexity level is associated with this attack. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 1.2
Severity: HIGH
AV:L/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
cvss3
Base: 2.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
cvss4
Base: 1.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/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
Description

OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From version 5.0 to 5.7, the interview attachment retrieval endpoint in the Recruitment module serves files based solely on an authenticated session and user-supplied identifiers, without verifying whether the requester has permission to access the associated interview record. Because the server does not perform any recruitment-level authorization checks, an ESS-level user with no access to recruitment workflows can directly request interview attachment URLs and receive the corresponding files. This exposes confidential interview documents—including candidate CVs, evaluations, and supporting files—to unauthorized users. The issue arises from relying on predictable object identifiers and session presence rather than validating the user’s association with the relevant recruitment process. This issue has been patched in version 5.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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

OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From version 5.0 to 5.7, the application’s recruitment attachment retrieval endpoint does not enforce the required authorization checks before serving candidate files. Even users restricted to ESS-level access, who have no permission to view the Recruitment module, can directly access candidate attachment URLs. When an authenticated request is made to the attachment endpoint, the system validates the session but does not confirm that the requesting user has the necessary recruitment permissions. As a result, any authenticated user can download CVs and other uploaded documents for arbitrary candidates by issuing direct requests to the attachment endpoint, leading to unauthorized exposure of sensitive applicant data. This issue has been patched in version 5.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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

OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From version 5.0 to 5.7, the application does not invalidate existing sessions when a user is disabled or when a password change occurs, allowing active session cookies to remain valid indefinitely. As a result, a disabled user, or an attacker using a compromised account, can continue to access protected pages and perform operations as long as a prior session remains active. Because the server performs no session revocation or session-store cleanup during these critical state changes, disabling an account or updating credentials has no effect on already-established sessions. This makes administrative disable actions ineffective and allows unauthorized users to retain full access even after an account is closed or a password is reset, exposing the system to prolonged unauthorized use and significantly increasing the impact of account takeover scenarios. This issue has been patched in version 5.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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

OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From version 5.0 to 5.7, the password reset workflow does not enforce that the username submitted in the final reset request matches the account for which the reset process was originally initiated. After obtaining a valid reset link for any account they can receive email for, an attacker can alter the username parameter in the final reset request to target a different user. Because the system accepts the supplied username without verification, the attacker can set a new password for any chosen account, including privileged accounts, resulting in full account takeover. This issue has been patched in version 5.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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