Comparison Overview

Amazon

VS

Red Hat

Amazon

2127 7th Ave., None, Seattle, WA, US, 98109
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 800 and 849

Amazon is guided by four principles: customer obsession rather than competitor focus, passion for invention, commitment to operational excellence, and long-term thinking. We are driven by the excitement of building technologies, inventing products, and providing services that change lives. We embrace new ways of doing things, make decisions quickly, and are not afraid to fail. We have the scope and capabilities of a large company, and the spirit and heart of a small one. Together, Amazonians research and develop new technologies from Amazon Web Services to Alexa on behalf of our customers: shoppers, sellers, content creators, and developers around the world. Our mission is to be Earth's most customer-centric company. Our actions, goals, projects, programs, and inventions begin and end with the customer top of mind. You'll also hear us say that at Amazon, it's always "Day 1."​ What do we mean? That our approach remains the same as it was on Amazon's very first day - to make smart, fast decisions, stay nimble, invent, and focus on delighting our customers.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 746,947
Subsidiaries: 88
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
5

Red Hat

100 E. Davie St., Raleigh, NC, US, 27601
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 650 and 699

Red Hat is the world’s leading provider of enterprise open source solutions, using a community-powered approach to deliver high-performing Linux, hybrid cloud, edge, and Kubernetes technologies. We hire creative, passionate people who are ready to contribute their ideas, help solve complex problems, and make an impact. Opportunities are open. Join us.

NAICS: 5112
NAICS Definition: Software Publishers
Employees: 19,569
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/amazon.jpeg
Amazon
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/red-hat.jpeg
Red Hat
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
Amazon
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Red Hat
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Amazon has 72.41% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Software Development Industry Average (This Year)

Red Hat has 417.24% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Amazon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Red Hat (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Red Hat cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/amazon.jpeg
Amazon
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Remote Code Execution (RCE)
Motivation: State-sponsored cyber operations
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Exposed Docker API, Misconfigured AWS EC2 Instances, Python Docker SDK
Motivation: Financial Gain, Disruption, Cybercrime-as-a-Service
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/red-hat.jpeg
Red Hat
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Social Engineering (likely), Insider Threat (possible), Exploitation of Vulnerabilities (unconfirmed)
Motivation: Financial Gain, Notoriety, Data Theft for Extortion
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: compromised consulting repositories, stolen credentials/API keys, supply chain exploitation
Motivation: financial gain (extortion), strategic disruption, potential nation-state intelligence collection, weaponizing political timing
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Authenticated remote attacker exploiting improper permission assignments in OpenShift AI
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Amazon company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Red Hat company.

In the current year, Amazon company has reported more cyber incidents than Red Hat company.

Amazon company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Red Hat company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Red Hat company and Amazon company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Amazon company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Red Hat company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Amazon company and Red Hat company have disclosed vulnerabilities.

Neither Amazon nor Red Hat holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Amazon company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Red Hat company.

Amazon company employs more people globally than Red Hat company, reflecting its scale as a Software Development.

Neither Amazon nor Red Hat holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Amazon nor Red Hat holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Amazon nor Red Hat holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Amazon nor Red Hat holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Amazon nor Red Hat holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Amazon nor Red Hat holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

FreePBX Endpoint Manager is a module for managing telephony endpoints in FreePBX systems. Versions prior to 16.0.96 and 17.0.1 through 17.0.9 have a weak default password. By default, this is a 6 digit numeric value which can be brute forced. (This is the app_password parameter). Depending on local configuration, this password could be the extension, voicemail, user manager, DPMA or EPM phone admin password. This issue is fixed in versions 16.0.96 and 17.0.10.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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

Neuron is a PHP framework for creating and orchestrating AI Agents. In versions 2.8.11 and below, the MySQLWriteTool executes arbitrary SQL provided by the caller using PDO::prepare() + execute() without semantic restrictions. This is consistent with the name (“write tool”), but in an LLM/agent context it becomes a high-risk capability: prompt injection or indirect prompt manipulation can cause execution of destructive queries such as DROP TABLE, TRUNCATE, DELETE, ALTER, or privilege-related statements (subject to DB permissions). Deployments that expose an agent with MySQLWriteTool enabled to untrusted input and/or run the tool with a DB user that has broad privileges are impacted. This issue is fixed in version 2.8.12.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
Description

Neuron is a PHP framework for creating and orchestrating AI Agents. Versions 2.8.11 and below use MySQLSelectTool, which is vulnerable to Read-Only Bypass. MySQLSelectTool is intended to be a read-only SQL tool (e.g., for LLM agent querying, however, validation based on the first keyword (e.g., SELECT) and a forbidden-keyword list does not block file-writing constructs such as INTO OUTFILE / INTO DUMPFILE. As a result, an attacker who can influence the tool input (e.g., via prompt injection through a public agent endpoint) may write arbitrary files to the DB server if the MySQL/MariaDB account has the FILE privilege and server configuration permits writes to a useful location (e.g., a web-accessible directory). This issue is fixed in version 2.8.12.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

Okta Java Management SDK facilitates interactions with the Okta management API. In versions 11.0.0 through 20.0.0, race conditions may arise from concurrent requests using the ApiClient class. This could cause a status code or response header from one request’s response to influence another request’s response. This issue is fixed in version 20.0.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.4
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

The Auth0 Next.js SDK is a library for implementing user authentication in Next.js applications. When using versions 4.11.0 through 4.11.2 and 4.12.0, simultaneous requests on the same client may result in improper lookups in the TokenRequestCache for the request results. This issue is fixed in versions 4.11.2 and 4.12.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N