Comparison Overview
YPF Digital

YPF Digital
Macacha Güemes 515, Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires, 1107, AR
Last Update: 01/02/2026
We are a new company that integrates the digital assets through which YPF is linked to its customers. We start from the integration of applications, the launch of new solutions and the acceleration of "time to market" to develop ecosystems focused on people and on the r...

N/A
Last Update: 08/06/2026
More than one billion people around the world use Instagram, and we’re proud to be bringing them closer to the people and things they love. Instagram inspires people to see the world differently, discover new interests, and express themselves. Since launching in 2010, ...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

YPF Digital













Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for YPF Digital in 2026.
Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)
Instagram has 385.44% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - YPF Digital (X = Date, Y = Severity)
YPF Digital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Instagram (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Instagram cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

YPF Digital

FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.