Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

Zoho ChinaZoho China
VS
GoogleGoogle
Zoho China

Zoho China

Beijing, 150718, CN

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.zoho.com.cn/
753/1000Fair

Zoho(卓豪)是能够满足企业运行和管理的一站式云平台,已陆续推出50多款在线SaaS软件产品,包括CRM、在线Office、邮箱、项目管理、团队协作、人事管理、财务管理、BI商业智能、应用开发平台等等。从超大规模的跨国企业,到刚刚起步的创业公司;从协同工作的团队,到自由职业的个人,目前在150多个国家和地区拥有超过1亿用户。Zoho不仅仅是一系列软件工具,更是每个人喜爱的工作和生活方式。 Zoho is a one-stop cloud platform that can meet the needs of enterprise ...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:73
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Google

Google

1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, 94043, US

Last Update: 25/08/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
https://goo.gle/3DLEokh
160/1000Critical

A problem isn't truly solved until it's solved for all. Googlers build products that help create opportunities for everyone, whether down the street or across the globe. Bring your insight, imagination and a healthy disregard for the impossible. Bring everything that ma...

NAICS:5112
NAICS Definition:Software Publishers
Employees:313,465
Subsidiaries:53
12-month incidents
54
Known data breaches
21
Attack type number
5

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Zoho China

Zoho China

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Google

Google

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Zoho China in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Avg (This Year)

Google has 5092.31% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Zoho China (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Zoho China cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Google (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Google cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Zoho China

Zoho China

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Google

Google

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
GOOOPE1787668071
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
AOLMICYAHFASGOO1786188226
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
GOOANTOPE1786465634

FAQ

Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Zoho China company and Google company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Zoho China and Google, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Zoho China and Google, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Zoho China or Google ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Zoho China or Google ?
Between Zoho China and Google, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Zoho China and Google, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-81203
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Simple Online Food Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=login2. The manipulation of the argument email leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-80158
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in the ipa_getkeytab module of the community.general Ansible collection. The module's bind_pw parameter, used to supply the LDAP simple-bind password when retrieving a Kerberos keytab, is not declared with no_log, unlike the sibling password parameter in the same module. As a consequence, the supplied IPA/LDAP bind password is recorded in cleartext in the managed host's system journal/syslog (the module's "Invoked with" record), is included in the module's return values and verbose (-v) output, and is displayed in Automation Controller / AWX job output. The password is additionally passed on the command line to the ipa-getkeytab helper (as --bindpw <value>), exposing it in the process list to local users while the command runs. An attacker able to read these logs, job output, or the process table can obtain the directory bind credential, potentially compromising the accounts and objects that credential can access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-75340
SUMMARY

The device metadata import interface /device/instance/{productId}/property-metadata/import of jetlinks community 2.11 is vulnerable to Server-side request forgery (SSRF).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75338
SUMMARY

disconf (Distributed Configuration Management Platform) 2.6.36 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control. The config-fetching APIs /api/config/item, /api/config/file, /api/config/list and /api/config/simple/list are exposed without authentication. The LoginInterceptor explicitly whitelists these four paths, so any anonymous attacker can read every configuration item and configuration file managed by the config center.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75336
SUMMARY

Funiture 1.0.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the backend tool interfaces /sys/tool/select.json and /sys/tool/update.json.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA