XMF
Company Details
Linkedin ID:
x
Website:
Employees number:
2,221
Number of followers:
175,235
NAICS:
None
Industry Type:
Homepage:
x.company
IP Addresses:
0
Company ID:
X, _2097941
Scan Status:
In-progress
X, The Moonshot Factory Company CyberSecurity Posture
x.company
We create breakthrough technologies to help solve some of the world’s biggest problems. Born at Google, we got our start creating self-driving cars and smart glasses. Since then, we’ve continued to bring sci-fi ideas into reality.
X, The Moonshot Factory A.I CyberSecurity Scoring
XMF Risk Score (AI oriented)Between 600 and 649
XMF
Updated:
- Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
- Insurance preferes TPRM score to calculate premium
XMF Global Score (TPRM)XXXX
XMF
- Instant access to detailed risk factors
- Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
- Vulnerabilities
- Findings
XMF Company CyberSecurity News & History
Past Incidents
1
Attack Types
1
X (formerly Twitter)
Breach
Rankiteo Explanation
Attack threatening the organization's existence
Description: In 2025, **X** suffered a catastrophic data breach stemming from misconfigured backend systems and insider threats during layoffs. Over **200 million user records** (later expanded to **2.8 billion records totaling 400GB**) were exposed, including **emails, bios, follower counts, user IDs, locations, and interaction histories**. The leak originated from legacy Twitter infrastructure clashing with new AI-driven features (e.g., Grok AI), bypassing privacy controls and enabling public API access to private data. Opportunistic scrapers and disgruntled employees exploited the vulnerability, fueling black-market data sales. The breach triggered **regulatory investigations (GDPR, FTC)**, **advertiser pullbacks**, **class-action lawsuits**, and **user migration** due to eroded trust. Financial losses included **$285,000/hour during outages**, with long-term reputational and legal costs projected in the billions. The incident underscored systemic failures in **access controls, transparency, and AI integration**, amplifying calls for federal privacy reforms.
XMF Company Scoring based on AI Models
Cyber Incidents Likelihood 3 - 6 - 9 months
A.I Risk Score Likelihood 3 - 6 - 9 months
Underwriter Stats for XMF
Incidents vs Research Industry Average (This Year)
X, The Moonshot Factory has 0.0% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs All-Companies Average (This Year)
X, The Moonshot Factory has 56.25% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident Types XMF vs Research Industry Avg (This Year)
X, The Moonshot Factory reported 1 incidents this year: 0 cyber attacks, 0 ransomware, 0 vulnerabilities, 1 data breaches, compared to industry peers with at least 1 incident.
Incident History — XMF (X = Date, Y = Severity)
XMF cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries
XMF Company Subsidiaries
We create breakthrough technologies to help solve some of the world’s biggest problems. Born at Google, we got our start creating self-driving cars and smart glasses. Since then, we’ve continued to bring sci-fi ideas into reality.
Loading...
XMF Similar Companies
Aarhus Universitet
Aarhus Universitet blev grundlagt i 1928 og er i dag i den absolutte verdenselite på flere forskningsfelter. Aarhus Universitet (AU) er blandt verdens 10 bedste universiteter grundlagt inden for de seneste 100 år og har en lang tradition for partnerskaber med nogle af verdens bedste forskningsinst
CSIC
The Spanish National Research Council (Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas-CSIC) is a government agency for basic and applied scientific research. It is the largest public research performing organisation in Spain, with 126 centers. El Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (
Health Care Engineering Systems Center at Illinois
The Health Care Engineering Systems Center (HCESC) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign provides clinical immersion and fosters collaboration between engineers and physicians. The goal is to use our expertise in the broad areas of simulation technologies, smart health systems, data anal
Københavns Universitet - University of Copenhagen
Københavns Universitet er med cirka 40.000 studerende og 9.000 medarbejdere en af Nordens største forsknings- og uddannelsesinstitutioner. Københavns Universitets mål er at drive forskning af højeste kvalitet, at tilbyde forskningsbaseret uddannelse til det højeste akademiske niveau, og at formid
Ipsos France
Chez Ipsos, nous sommes passionnément curieux des individus, des marchés, des marques et de la société. Nous aidons nos clients à naviguer plus vite et plus aisément dans un monde en profonde mutation. Nous leur apportons l'inspiration nécessaire à la prise de décisions stratégiques. Nous
.png)
XMF CyberSecurity News
October 23, 2025 07:00 AM
MasterClass Launches Certificate Course with X, The Moonshot Factory: Breakthrough Innovation Strategy
MasterClass, the streaming platform where anyone can learn from the world's best, today launched Breakthrough Innovation Strategy: From Bold...
March 19, 2025 07:00 AM
Google just created a new internet with a tiny fingernail-sized chip
Google X has introduced the Taara chip, a fingernail-sized invention that taps the "virtually limitless" potential of light-based internet connectivity.
March 18, 2025 07:00 AM
Google’s broadband balloon tech floated as indie company
Google's attempt to provide remote area connectivity with balloons has been floated out as an independent company, a rare success for the company's attempt to...
October 01, 2024 07:00 AM
UK technology experts set to shape government digital vision
Technology leaders, inclusion advocates, and leading academics will shape the government's new 'digital centre' to boost how technology is used to repair...
May 04, 2023 07:00 AM
How Public-Private Information Sharing Can Level the Cybersecurity Playing Field
Sharing information is critical to help organizations protect data and systems. To be even more effective, collaboration should be inclusive...
April 06, 2023 07:00 AM
Chronicle SIEM is a Gartner Peer Insights Customers’ Choice
In 2016, Google's "X", the moonshot factory, began working on a project aimed to take on cybersecurity. The belief that we could increase...
June 15, 2022 02:01 PM
Mike Wiacek
Stairwell CEO and Founder Mike Wiacek has built a career around curing the biggest cybersecurity headaches. His groundbreaking achievements in the fields of...
February 24, 2022 08:00 AM
5 big lessons I learned by working at Google and Alphabet’s X
Building a unique culture helps, of course. But you should also tackle the biggest problems first, and fall in love with problems rather...
January 04, 2022 08:00 AM
Google acquires Israeli cybersecurity company Siemplify for $500m
Google has acquired another Israeli company, threat detection firm Siemplify, for a reported $500 million, nine years after its $1 billion purchase of...
Frequently Asked Questions
Explore insights on cybersecurity incidents, risk posture, and Rankiteo's assessments.
XMF CyberSecurity History Information
Official Website of X, The Moonshot Factory
The official website of X, The Moonshot Factory is https://x.company.
X, The Moonshot Factory’s AI-Generated Cybersecurity Score
According to Rankiteo, X, The Moonshot Factory’s AI-generated cybersecurity score is 629, reflecting their Poor security posture.
How many security badges does X, The Moonshot Factory’ have ?
According to Rankiteo, X, The Moonshot Factory currently holds 0 security badges, indicating that no recognized compliance certifications are currently verified for the organization.
Does X, The Moonshot Factory have SOC 2 Type 1 certification ?
According to Rankiteo, X, The Moonshot Factory is not certified under SOC 2 Type 1.
Does X, The Moonshot Factory have SOC 2 Type 2 certification ?
According to Rankiteo, X, The Moonshot Factory does not hold a SOC 2 Type 2 certification.
Does X, The Moonshot Factory comply with GDPR ?
According to Rankiteo, X, The Moonshot Factory is not listed as GDPR compliant.
Does X, The Moonshot Factory have PCI DSS certification ?
According to Rankiteo, X, The Moonshot Factory does not currently maintain PCI DSS compliance.
Does X, The Moonshot Factory comply with HIPAA ?
According to Rankiteo, X, The Moonshot Factory is not compliant with HIPAA regulations.
Does X, The Moonshot Factory have ISO 27001 certification ?
According to Rankiteo,X, The Moonshot Factory is not certified under ISO 27001, indicating the absence of a formally recognized information security management framework.
Industry Classification of X, The Moonshot Factory
X, The Moonshot Factory operates primarily in the Research industry.
Number of Employees at X, The Moonshot Factory
X, The Moonshot Factory employs approximately 2,221 people worldwide.
Subsidiaries Owned by X, The Moonshot Factory
X, The Moonshot Factory presently has no subsidiaries across any sectors.
X, The Moonshot Factory’s LinkedIn Followers
X, The Moonshot Factory’s official LinkedIn profile has approximately 175,235 followers.
NAICS Classification of X, The Moonshot Factory
X, The Moonshot Factory is classified under the NAICS code None, which corresponds to Others.
X, The Moonshot Factory’s Presence on Crunchbase
No, X, The Moonshot Factory does not have a profile on Crunchbase.
X, The Moonshot Factory’s Presence on LinkedIn
Yes, X, The Moonshot Factory maintains an official LinkedIn profile, which is actively utilized for branding and talent engagement, which can be accessed here: https://www.linkedin.com/company/x.
Cybersecurity Incidents Involving X, The Moonshot Factory
As of November 27, 2025, Rankiteo reports that X, The Moonshot Factory has experienced 1 cybersecurity incidents.
Number of Peer and Competitor Companies
X, The Moonshot Factory has an estimated 1,199 peer or competitor companies worldwide.
What types of cybersecurity incidents have occurred at X, The Moonshot Factory ?
Incident Types: The types of cybersecurity incidents that have occurred include Breach.
What was the total financial impact of these incidents on X, The Moonshot Factory ?
Total Financial Loss: The total financial loss from these incidents is estimated to be $285 trillion.
How does X, The Moonshot Factory detect and respond to cybersecurity incidents ?
Detection and Response: The company detects and responds to cybersecurity incidents through an remediation measures with public warnings (e.g., musk’s hacker alerts), remediation measures with user advisories for password changes/2fa, and communication strategy with limited transparency, communication strategy with public posts by musk and cybersecurity accounts..
Incident Details
Can you provide details on each incident ?
Title: The Shadow Breach: X’s 2025 Data Catastrophe and the Erosion of Digital Trust
Description: In 2025, X (formerly Twitter) experienced a massive data exposure due to an accidental configuration error in its backend systems, leaking sensitive user information via public APIs. The breach, compounded by insider threats and legacy infrastructure vulnerabilities, affected potentially billions of users, exposing records including emails, bios, follower counts, user IDs, locations, and interaction histories. The incident led to financial losses, regulatory scrutiny, and a severe erosion of user trust.
Date Detected: 2025-03
Date Publicly Disclosed: 2025-03
Type: Data Breach
Attack Vector: Accidental Configuration ErrorPublic API ExposureInsider Data Exfiltration
Vulnerability Exploited: Legacy Infrastructure WeaknessesInadequate Data Anonymization in AI Features (e.g., Grok AI)Lack of Access Controls During Layoffs
Threat Actor: Opportunistic Data ScrapersDisgruntled Former Employee(s)
Motivation: Financial Gain (Black Market Data Sales)Retaliation (Insider Threat)
What are the most common types of attacks the company has faced ?
Common Attack Types: The most common types of attacks the company has faced is Breach.
How does the company identify the attack vectors used in incidents ?
Identification of Attack Vectors: The company identifies the attack vectors used in incidents through Public APIs and misconfigured backend tools.
Impact of the Incidents
What was the impact of each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Financial Loss: $285,000 per hour during outages (November 2025); potential billions in GDPR fines
Data Compromised: User ids, Locations, Interaction histories, Emails, Bios, Follower counts, Metadata
Systems Affected: Public APIsBackend Developer ToolsAI-Driven Features (e.g., Grok AI)
Downtime: Intermittent outages reported (e.g., March 2025 DDoS-like incident)
Operational Impact: Advertiser pullback, regulatory investigations, loss of user trust
Revenue Loss: Significant (exact figures undisclosed, but outages alone cost $285K/hour)
Customer Complaints: Widespread user backlash, migration to competitor platforms
Brand Reputation Impact: Severe erosion of trust, criticism over transparency and security practices
Legal Liabilities: Potential GDPR fines (billions)Class-action lawsuitsFTC consent decrees
Identity Theft Risk: High (exposed PII sold on black market)
What is the average financial loss per incident ?
Average Financial Loss: The average financial loss per incident is $285.00 trillion.
What types of data are most commonly compromised in incidents ?
Commonly Compromised Data Types: The types of data most commonly compromised in incidents are Personally Identifiable Information (Pii), Metadata, User Interaction Histories, Emails, Bios, Follower Counts, Locations and .
Which entities were affected by each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Entity Name: X (formerly Twitter)
Entity Type: Social Media Platform
Industry: Technology/Social Media
Location: Global (HQ: San Francisco, USA)
Size: Billions of users
Customers Affected: Potentially billions (200 million records confirmed in April 2025; 2.8 billion records alleged in 400GB leak)
Response to the Incidents
What measures were taken in response to each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Remediation Measures: Public warnings (e.g., Musk’s hacker alerts)User advisories for password changes/2FA
Communication Strategy: Limited transparencyPublic posts by Musk and cybersecurity accounts
Data Breach Information
What type of data was compromised in each breach ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Type of Data Compromised: Personally identifiable information (pii), Metadata, User interaction histories, Emails, Bios, Follower counts, Locations
Number of Records Exposed: 200 million (confirmed); up to 2.8 billion (alleged)
Sensitivity of Data: High (includes PII, location data, and private interactions)
Data Exfiltration: Yes (harvested by scrapers and insider(s))
Data Encryption: No (data was exposed in plaintext via APIs)
File Types Exposed: API logsUser databasesMetadata
Personally Identifiable Information: Yes (emails, user IDs, locations, bios)
What measures does the company take to prevent data exfiltration ?
Prevention of Data Exfiltration: The company takes the following measures to prevent data exfiltration: Public warnings (e.g., Musk’s hacker alerts), User advisories for password changes/2FA, .
Regulatory Compliance
Were there any regulatory violations and fines imposed for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Regulations Violated: GDPR (potential), FTC Consent Decrees (under investigation),
Fines Imposed: Potential billions (GDPR)
Legal Actions: Class-action lawsuits, FTC investigations, EU GDPR probes,
Regulatory Notifications: EU GDPR watchdogs notifiedFTC ongoing investigations
How does the company ensure compliance with regulatory requirements ?
Ensuring Regulatory Compliance: The company ensures compliance with regulatory requirements through Class-action lawsuits, FTC investigations, EU GDPR probes, .
Lessons Learned and Recommendations
What lessons were learned from each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Lessons Learned: Legacy infrastructure and new AI features must be integrated with robust security controls., Insider threats during layoffs require stricter access revocation protocols., Public APIs and developer tools need rigorous privacy safeguards., Transparency and timely disclosure are critical to maintaining user trust.
What recommendations were made to prevent future incidents ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Recommendations: Implement zero-trust architecture and regular security audits., Enhance data anonymization for AI-driven features., Strengthen insider threat detection and employee offboarding processes., Adopt user-controlled data privacy options (e.g., granular consent settings)., Collaborate with regulators to align with GDPR and other privacy laws., Invest in encryption for data at rest and in transit.Implement zero-trust architecture and regular security audits., Enhance data anonymization for AI-driven features., Strengthen insider threat detection and employee offboarding processes., Adopt user-controlled data privacy options (e.g., granular consent settings)., Collaborate with regulators to align with GDPR and other privacy laws., Invest in encryption for data at rest and in transit.Implement zero-trust architecture and regular security audits., Enhance data anonymization for AI-driven features., Strengthen insider threat detection and employee offboarding processes., Adopt user-controlled data privacy options (e.g., granular consent settings)., Collaborate with regulators to align with GDPR and other privacy laws., Invest in encryption for data at rest and in transit.Implement zero-trust architecture and regular security audits., Enhance data anonymization for AI-driven features., Strengthen insider threat detection and employee offboarding processes., Adopt user-controlled data privacy options (e.g., granular consent settings)., Collaborate with regulators to align with GDPR and other privacy laws., Invest in encryption for data at rest and in transit.Implement zero-trust architecture and regular security audits., Enhance data anonymization for AI-driven features., Strengthen insider threat detection and employee offboarding processes., Adopt user-controlled data privacy options (e.g., granular consent settings)., Collaborate with regulators to align with GDPR and other privacy laws., Invest in encryption for data at rest and in transit.Implement zero-trust architecture and regular security audits., Enhance data anonymization for AI-driven features., Strengthen insider threat detection and employee offboarding processes., Adopt user-controlled data privacy options (e.g., granular consent settings)., Collaborate with regulators to align with GDPR and other privacy laws., Invest in encryption for data at rest and in transit.
What are the key lessons learned from past incidents ?
Key Lessons Learned: The key lessons learned from past incidents are Legacy infrastructure and new AI features must be integrated with robust security controls.,Insider threats during layoffs require stricter access revocation protocols.,Public APIs and developer tools need rigorous privacy safeguards.,Transparency and timely disclosure are critical to maintaining user trust.
References
Where can I find more information about each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Source: Platformer (2023 Internal Documents)
Date Accessed: 2023
Where can stakeholders find additional resources on cybersecurity best practices ?
Additional Resources: Stakeholders can find additional resources on cybersecurity best practices at and Source: Weaponized Spaces (Substack)Date Accessed: 2025-03, and Source: BankInfoSecurityDate Accessed: 2025-03, and Source: GRC ReportDate Accessed: 2025-04, and Source: Proton Pass (X Thread)Date Accessed: 2025-03, and Source: CyberPressDate Accessed: 2025-03, and Source: RescanaUrl: https://rescana.comDate Accessed: 2025-04, and Source: Platformer (2023 Internal Documents)Date Accessed: 2023, and Source: ReutersDate Accessed: 2025-11, and Source: Finance MonthlyDate Accessed: 2025-11, and Source: AU10TIX Exposure (X Daily News)Date Accessed: 2024, and Source: Bright Defense (2025 Breach Lists)Date Accessed: 2025, and Source: Information Security BuzzDate Accessed: 2025-04, and Source: Tech.coDate Accessed: 2025.
Investigation Status
What is the current status of the investigation for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Investigation Status: Ongoing (EU GDPR and FTC investigations, internal reviews)
How does the company communicate the status of incident investigations to stakeholders ?
Communication of Investigation Status: The company communicates the status of incident investigations to stakeholders through Limited Transparency and Public Posts By Musk And Cybersecurity Accounts.
Stakeholder and Customer Advisories
Were there any advisories issued to stakeholders or customers for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Stakeholder Advisories: Users Advised To Monitor For Identity Theft, Change Passwords, Enable 2Fa.
Customer Advisories: Proton Pass recommendations for password managers/VPNsX’s limited public warnings
What advisories does the company provide to stakeholders and customers following an incident ?
Advisories Provided: The company provides the following advisories to stakeholders and customers following an incident: were Users Advised To Monitor For Identity Theft, Change Passwords, Enable 2Fa, Proton Pass Recommendations For Password Managers/Vpns, X’S Limited Public Warnings and .
Initial Access Broker
How did the initial access broker gain entry for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Entry Point: Public APIs and misconfigured backend tools
Reconnaissance Period: Weeks (exposure went unnoticed initially)
High Value Targets: User Pii, Interaction Metadata, Ai Training Datasets,
Data Sold on Dark Web: User Pii, Interaction Metadata, Ai Training Datasets,
Post-Incident Analysis
What were the root causes and corrective actions taken for each incident ?
Incident : Data Breach X19101619112425
Root Causes: Accidental Api Misconfiguration During Feature Updates, Legacy Twitter Infrastructure Clashes With New Xai Integrations, Inadequate Data Anonymization In Ai Features (E.G., Grok Ai), Insider Threat During Mass Layoffs (Disgruntled Employee Retaliation), Lack Of Real-Time Monitoring For Anomalous Data Flows,
Corrective Actions: Systemic Overhaul Of Api Access Controls, Mandatory Encryption For Sensitive Data, Enhanced Insider Threat Detection Programs, Regular Third-Party Security Audits, Transparency Reports To Rebuild User Trust,
What corrective actions has the company taken based on post-incident analysis ?
Corrective Actions Taken: The company has taken the following corrective actions based on post-incident analysis: Systemic Overhaul Of Api Access Controls, Mandatory Encryption For Sensitive Data, Enhanced Insider Threat Detection Programs, Regular Third-Party Security Audits, Transparency Reports To Rebuild User Trust, .
Additional Questions
General Information
Who was the attacking group in the last incident ?
Last Attacking Group: The attacking group in the last incident was an Opportunistic Data ScrapersDisgruntled Former Employee(s).
Incident Details
What was the most recent incident detected ?
Most Recent Incident Detected: The most recent incident detected was on 2025-03.
What was the most recent incident publicly disclosed ?
Most Recent Incident Publicly Disclosed: The most recent incident publicly disclosed was on 2025-03.
Impact of the Incidents
What was the highest financial loss from an incident ?
Highest Financial Loss: The highest financial loss from an incident was $285,000 per hour during outages (November 2025); potential billions in GDPR fines.
What was the most significant data compromised in an incident ?
Most Significant Data Compromised: The most significant data compromised in an incident were User IDs, Locations, Interaction Histories, Emails, Bios, Follower Counts, Metadata and .
What was the most significant system affected in an incident ?
Most Significant System Affected: The most significant system affected in an incident were Public APIsBackend Developer ToolsAI-Driven Features (e.g., Grok AI).
Data Breach Information
What was the most sensitive data compromised in a breach ?
Most Sensitive Data Compromised: The most sensitive data compromised in a breach were Interaction Histories, Bios, User IDs, Locations, Metadata, Follower Counts and Emails.
What was the number of records exposed in the most significant breach ?
Number of Records Exposed in Most Significant Breach: The number of records exposed in the most significant breach was 3.0B.
Regulatory Compliance
What was the highest fine imposed for a regulatory violation ?
Highest Fine Imposed: The highest fine imposed for a regulatory violation was Potential billions (GDPR).
What was the most significant legal action taken for a regulatory violation ?
Most Significant Legal Action: The most significant legal action taken for a regulatory violation was Class-action lawsuits, FTC investigations, EU GDPR probes, .
Lessons Learned and Recommendations
What was the most significant lesson learned from past incidents ?
Most Significant Lesson Learned: The most significant lesson learned from past incidents was Transparency and timely disclosure are critical to maintaining user trust.
What was the most significant recommendation implemented to improve cybersecurity ?
Most Significant Recommendation Implemented: The most significant recommendation implemented to improve cybersecurity was Enhance data anonymization for AI-driven features., Implement zero-trust architecture and regular security audits., Invest in encryption for data at rest and in transit., Strengthen insider threat detection and employee offboarding processes., Adopt user-controlled data privacy options (e.g., granular consent settings). and Collaborate with regulators to align with GDPR and other privacy laws..
References
What is the most recent source of information about an incident ?
Most Recent Source: The most recent source of information about an incident are GRC Report, Platformer (2023 Internal Documents), CyberPress, Information Security Buzz, Tech.co, Weaponized Spaces (Substack), Reuters, Finance Monthly, AU10TIX Exposure (X Daily News), Rescana, BankInfoSecurity, Bright Defense (2025 Breach Lists) and Proton Pass (X Thread).
What is the most recent URL for additional resources on cybersecurity best practices ?
Most Recent URL for Additional Resources: The most recent URL for additional resources on cybersecurity best practices is https://rescana.com .
Investigation Status
What is the current status of the most recent investigation ?
Current Status of Most Recent Investigation: The current status of the most recent investigation is Ongoing (EU GDPR and FTC investigations, internal reviews).
Stakeholder and Customer Advisories
What was the most recent stakeholder advisory issued ?
Most Recent Stakeholder Advisory: The most recent stakeholder advisory issued was Users advised to monitor for identity theft, change passwords, enable 2FA, .
What was the most recent customer advisory issued ?
Most Recent Customer Advisory: The most recent customer advisory issued was an Proton Pass recommendations for password managers/VPNsX’s limited public warnings.
Initial Access Broker
What was the most recent entry point used by an initial access broker ?
Most Recent Entry Point: The most recent entry point used by an initial access broker was an Public APIs and misconfigured backend tools.
What was the most recent reconnaissance period for an incident ?
Most Recent Reconnaissance Period: The most recent reconnaissance period for an incident was Weeks (exposure went unnoticed initially).
.png)
Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)
Description
Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
References
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/0276479e7d0e280e0f8d26fa567d3b7aa97a516f
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/05fe6686a97fa0bcd3cf157805b3612033f975bc
- https://github.com/angular/angular/commit/3240d856d942727372a705252f7c8c115394a41e
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/19.2.16
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/20.3.14
- https://github.com/angular/angular/releases/tag/21.0.1
- https://github.com/angular/angular/security/advisories/GHSA-58c5-g7wp-6w37
Description
Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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
Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.
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
Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.
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
Access Data Using Our API
Get company history
curl -i -X GET 'https://api.rankiteo.com/underwriter-getcompany-history?linkedin_id=x' -H 'apikey: YOUR_API_KEY_HERE'
RapidWhat Do We Measure ?
Incident
Finding
Grade
Digital Assets
Every week, Rankiteo analyzes billions of signals to give organizations a sharper, faster view of emerging risks. With deeper, more actionable intelligence at their fingertips, security teams can outpace threat actors, respond instantly to Zero-Day attacks, and dramatically shrink their risk exposure window.
These are some of the factors we use to calculate the overall score:
Network Security
Identify exposed access points, detect misconfigured SSL certificates, and uncover vulnerabilities across the network infrastructure.
SBOM (Software Bill of Materials)
Gain visibility into the software components used within an organization to detect vulnerabilities, manage risk, and ensure supply chain security.
CMDB (Configuration Management Database)
Monitor and manage all IT assets and their configurations to ensure accurate, real-time visibility across the company's technology environment.
Threat Intelligence
Leverage real-time insights on active threats, malware campaigns, and emerging vulnerabilities to proactively defend against evolving cyberattacks.
Rankiteo is a unified scoring and risk platform that analyzes billions of signals weekly to help organizations gain faster, more actionable insights into emerging threats. Empowering teams to outpace adversaries and reduce exposure.
