Skip to main content
0-Doubt
NewsInvestorsQuestionnairesDeveloperHelp
AnonymousSign in
0-Doubt — neutral IT/Security research
BrowseResellersCertified analystsRFI/RFP questionnairesHow trust worksHelp & FAQAPI
  1. Home/
  2. Broadcom

Broadcom

enrichedPublic company (AVGO) ↗
Cloud-Native Application Protection (CNAPP)Data Loss PreventionEmail SecurityEncryptionIdentity & Access Management

Represented by AHEAD ↗, Carahsoft ↗, Converge Technology Solutions ↗, Mainline Information Systems ↗, Presidio ↗, Trace3 ↗, ePlus ↗

broadcom.com ↗ · required email domain for this vendor's users

Headquartered in United StatesHeadquarters countrySourced only from this vendor's own published headquarters address (schema.org structured data on their site) — never guessed from domain TLD. Source ↗

Do you work at Broadcom?

This profile was built from public sources and hasn't been claimed yet. Claiming it lets you correct what's wrong and add details only you can confirm — and marks that information as vendor-verified for buyers.

Free, and it does not affect ranking, placement, or comparison results. The first person verified on Broadcom's email domain becomes the profile admin.

Claim this profileAlready have an account?

Trust profileHow to read thisFive separate questions a buyer actually asks, each answered with its own evidence and a link to the source. There is deliberately no overall score: a single number invites comparison it cannot support, and would mostly reflect how much of Broadcom we have managed to scan rather than anything about the vendor.

Not checked means we have not looked yet, and is never counted against a vendor. Limited means we did look, but found only one line of evidence — enough to report, not enough to corroborate.

checked 10 of 16 signals
  • Limited

    Independently verified

    Has anyone other than the vendor confirmed this?

    checked 3 of 4

    Nothing here has been confirmed by an independent third party yet.

    • No third-party certifications found
    • Profile not claimed by the vendor
  • Strong

    Operating durability

    Is this a real, durable business?

    checked 3 of 4

    How long this vendor has been operating, and who stands behind them.

    • Domain registered 1994 — 32 years ago
    • Headquarters: United States
    • 1 public SEC filing(s) — financials are a matter of record
  • Mixed

    Behaviour under stress

    What do they do when something goes wrong?

    checked 2 of 3

    What their public record shows about handling vulnerabilities and outages.

    • 100 published CVE(s) — a public disclosure record exists
    • 17 rated critical
    • No public status page found
  • Limited

    Disclosure posture

    Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?

    checked 2 of 3

    How much this vendor volunteers before you have to ask.

    • No trust center found
    • No bug bounty or vulnerability disclosure policy found
  • Not checked

    Momentum

    Are they still shipping, or coasting?

    checked 0 of 2

    We have not tracked this vendor's release activity yet.

    Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against Broadcom.

Data coverage: 18/100What this measures (and doesn't)

Not a quality rating or endorsement — a measure of how much verified, disclosed data we actually have about this vendor. A low score usually means "we don't have much verified information yet," not "this is a bad vendor." Never used to sort or rank vendor lists.

Verification depth0/100
Security signal0/100
Buyer feedbackno data yet (0 reviews so far)
Profile completeness38/100
claim · HQ · materials · screenshots · integrations · certifications · security check

The platform admin controls the formula's weights.

Data coverage profileHow to read thisThe same four components behind the data coverage score above, shaped instead of listed — a vendor strong on verification but thin on buyer feedback looks visibly different from one that's the other way around. Security and feedback plot at the neutral midpoint (50) when there's no data yet (no products tracked, no reviews), matching how the actual score itself treats missing data — not a guess either way.

VerificationSecurityFeedbackCompletenessThis vendor — Verification: 0This vendor — Security: 0This vendor — Feedback: no data yetThis vendor — Completeness: 38

IntegrationsUI-12 — integration graphDetected from this vendor's own published integration/partner pages by the enrichment loop — each entry links the exact page it was found on. Directional: "integrates with" is claimed by this vendor; "integrated by" is claimed by the other vendor's site. Coverage grows as the scan progresses.

8 detected

Integrated by: 1Kosmos, Expel, Nirmata, OctoXLabs, Opscompass, SentinelOne, UncommonX, WinMagic

Buyer reviewsUI-14 — verified-buyer reviewsWritten only by domain-verified buyers at other companies, attributed to their company domain (never their identity), and moderated. Buyer-sourced opinion, clearly separate from the neutral catalog facts above — and never an input to search or comparison ordering.

verified buyers only

No buyer reviews yet.

Reputation ratingUI-20 — anonymous ratingA single anonymous 5-star signal from buyers, resellers, and analysts who've engaged with this vendor — separate from the domain-attributed reviews above. No rater identity is ever shown, not even at company level.

anonymous

No ratings in this window yet.

Enterprise DLP solution for discovering, monitoring, and protecting sensitive data AI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →

Security & trust signalsAbout these signalsCertifications are keyword-matched from the vendor's own public pages (each claim links to its source — verify directly before relying on it). Security headers are checked live against the vendor's homepage, re-checked every 90 days. Both are independent, automated signals, not a vendor-submitted or audited claim, and are not blended into a single score.

8 of 9 technical checks completed — not a score, just coverage

Security headers (4/5) — checked 8/13/2026

  • ✓ Strict-Transport-Security
  • ✓ Content-Security-Policy
  • ✓ X-Frame-Options
  • ✓ X-Content-Type-Options
  • ✕ Referrer-Policy
  • ✕ security.txt

Infrastructure & transparency signals

Domain since 1994DNSSEC enabled

CVE severity over timeUI-24 — CVE severity timelineEvery known CVE with a disclosure date and severity, plotted by when it was published — lets you see whether disclosures are trending toward more or less severe, not just a raw count. Same NVD-sourced, name-matched data as the list below.

LOWMEDIUMHIGHCRITICAL2005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023CVE-2023-4337 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4336 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4335 · HIGH 7.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4334 · HIGH 7.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4333 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4332 · HIGH 7.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4331 · HIGH 7.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4329 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4328 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4327 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4326 · HIGH 7.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4325 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4324 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4323 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2023-08-15CVE-2023-4345 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2023-08-15CVE-2022-3628 · MEDIUM 6.6 · 2023-01-13CVE-2022-3643 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2022-12-07CVE-2021-42775 · CRITICAL 9.1 · 2021-11-12CVE-2021-42774 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-11-12CVE-2021-42773 · HIGH 7.5 · 2021-11-12CVE-2021-42772 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-11-04CVE-2021-33478 · MEDIUM 6.8 · 2021-07-22CVE-2021-34174 · MEDIUM 4.6 · 2021-07-14CVE-2020-0019 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2020-12-15CVE-2020-0016 · HIGH 7.8 · 2020-12-15CVE-2020-6616 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2020-05-09CVE-2019-13916 · HIGH 8.8 · 2020-04-13CVE-2019-20549 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2020-03-24CVE-2019-20546 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2020-03-24CVE-2019-15126 · LOW 3.1 · 2020-02-05CVE-2019-11516 · HIGH 8.1 · 2020-02-05CVE-2019-9502 · HIGH 7.9 · 2020-02-04CVE-2019-9501 · HIGH 7.9 · 2020-02-04CVE-2019-9503 · HIGH 7.9 · 2020-01-17CVE-2019-9500 · HIGH 7.9 · 2020-01-17CVE-2019-19494 · HIGH 8.8 · 2020-01-09CVE-2018-19860 · HIGH 8.8 · 2019-06-07CVE-2017-13303 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2018-04-04CVE-2017-13213 · HIGH 7.8 · 2018-01-13CVE-2017-13161 · HIGH 7.8 · 2017-12-06CVE-2017-11122 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-10-04CVE-2017-0825 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-10-04CVE-2017-0824 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-10-04CVE-2017-11121 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-09-28CVE-2017-11120 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-09-28CVE-2017-0792 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2017-09-09CVE-2017-0791 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-09-09CVE-2017-0790 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-09-09CVE-2017-0789 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-09-09CVE-2017-0788 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-09-09CVE-2017-0787 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-09-09CVE-2017-0786 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-09-09CVE-2017-0740 · HIGH 7.8 · 2017-08-10CVE-2017-0706 · MEDIUM 6.8 · 2017-07-07CVE-2017-0705 · MEDIUM 6.8 · 2017-07-07CVE-2017-9417 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-06-05CVE-2017-0633 · MEDIUM 4.7 · 2017-05-12CVE-2016-2433 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-04-22CVE-2017-0585 · MEDIUM 4.7 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0574 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0573 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0572 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0571 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0570 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0569 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0568 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0567 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-0561 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-04-08CVE-2017-6975 · MEDIUM 6.8 · 2017-04-05CVE-2017-6956 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-04-05CVE-2017-6957 · HIGH 8.1 · 2017-03-27CVE-2013-4659 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-03-14CVE-2017-0509 · HIGH 7.8 · 2017-03-08CVE-2017-0449 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-02-08CVE-2017-0430 · HIGH 7.8 · 2017-02-08CVE-2014-9910 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-18CVE-2014-9909 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-18CVE-2016-8466 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-13CVE-2016-8465 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-13CVE-2016-8464 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-13CVE-2016-8457 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-13CVE-2016-8456 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-13CVE-2016-8455 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-13CVE-2016-8454 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-13CVE-2016-8453 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-01-13CVE-2016-3869 · HIGH 7.8 · 2016-09-12CVE-2016-2493 · HIGH 7.8 · 2016-06-13CVE-2016-2475 · HIGH 7.8 · 2016-06-13CVE-2016-0802 · HIGH 8.8 · 2016-02-07CVE-2016-0801 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2016-02-07CVE-2014-2046 · HIGH 9.7 · 2014-05-14CVE-2013-2852 · MEDIUM 6.9 · 2013-06-07CVE-2012-2619 · HIGH 7.8 · 2012-11-14CVE-2011-4503 · HIGH 7.5 · 2011-11-22CVE-2011-4499 · HIGH 7.5 · 2011-11-22CVE-2010-0104 · HIGH 10.0 · 2010-03-18CVE-2006-6904 · HIGH 7.9 · 2006-12-31CVE-2006-5882 · HIGH 8.3 · 2006-11-15CVE-2004-0619 · HIGH 7.2 · 2004-12-06

Known CVEs (100)About this listSourced from the public NVD database, matched by vendor name. This is a name-based match, not exact version tracking — always check the linked NVD record for affected versions before drawing conclusions. “New” means published within the last 30 days. “Actively exploited” means CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog confirms real-world exploitation, not just a theoretical severity score.

RSS ⇢
  • CVE-2023-4337 ↗CRITICAL 9.82023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable to improper session handling of managed servers on Gateway installation

  • CVE-2023-4336 ↗CRITICAL 9.82023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable due to insecure default of HTTP configuration that does not safeguard cookies with Secure attribute

  • CVE-2023-4335 ↗HIGH 7.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller Web server (nginx) is serving private server-side files without any authentication on Linux

  • CVE-2023-4334 ↗HIGH 7.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller Web server (nginx) is serving private files without any authentication

  • CVE-2023-4333 ↗MEDIUM 5.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface doesn’t enforce SSL cipher ordering by server

  • CVE-2023-4332 ↗HIGH 7.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable due to Improper permissions on the log file

  • CVE-2023-4331 ↗HIGH 7.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable has an insecure default TLS configuration that support obsolete and vulnerable TLS protocols

  • CVE-2023-4330 ↗2023

    Rejected reason: Broadcom were unable to duplicate the attack as described by Intel DCG Team.

  • CVE-2023-4329 ↗CRITICAL 9.82023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable due to insecure default of HTTP configuration that does not safeguard SESSIONID cookie with SameSite attribute

  • CVE-2023-4328 ↗MEDIUM 5.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable to exposure of sensitive data and the keys used for encryption are accessible to any local user on Windows

  • CVE-2023-4327 ↗MEDIUM 5.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable to exposure of sensitive data and the keys used for encryption are accessible to any local user on Linux

  • CVE-2023-4326 ↗HIGH 7.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable has an insecure default TLS configuration that supports obsolete SHA1-based ciphersuites

  • CVE-2023-4325 ↗CRITICAL 9.82023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable due to usage of Libcurl with LSA has known vulnerabilities

  • CVE-2023-4324 ↗CRITICAL 9.82023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable due to insecure defaults of lacking HTTP Content-Security-Policy headers

  • CVE-2023-4323 ↗CRITICAL 9.82023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable to improper session management of active sessions on Gateway setup

  • CVE-2023-4345 ↗MEDIUM 6.52023

    Broadcom RAID Controller web interface is vulnerable client-side control bypass leads to unauthorized data access for low privileged user

  • CVE-2022-3628 ↗MEDIUM 6.62023

    A buffer overflow flaw was found in the Linux kernel Broadcom Full MAC Wi-Fi driver. This issue occurs when a user connects to a malicious USB device. This can allow a local user to crash the system o…

  • CVE-2022-3643 ↗MEDIUM 6.52022

    Guests can trigger NIC interface reset/abort/crash via netback It is possible for a guest to trigger a NIC interface reset/abort/crash in a Linux based network backend by sending certain kinds of pack…

  • CVE-2021-42775 ↗CRITICAL 9.12021

    Broadcom Emulex HBA Manager/One Command Manager versions before 11.4.425.0 and 12.8.542.31, if not installed in Strictly Local Management mode, have a vulnerability in the remote firmware download fea…

  • CVE-2021-42774 ↗CRITICAL 9.82021

    Broadcom Emulex HBA Manager/One Command Manager versions before 11.4.425.0 and 12.8.542.31, if not installed in Strictly Local Management mode, have a buffer overflow vulnerability in the remote firmw…

  • …and 80 more

Competitors (12)

full alternatives comparison →
Alibaba CloudAtakamaBeachhead SolutionsBitdefenderComodoCrowdStrikeDarktraceDatadogESETFortinetFortraPalo Alto Networks

Products (5)

Cloud-Native Application Protection (CNAPP)

1
  • Broadcom Symantec Enterprise CloudAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Enterprise cloud security platform for endpoint, network, email & data protection

Identity & Access Management

1
  • Broadcom Identity and Access ManagementAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Enterprise IAM platform with zero trust identity fabric capabilities

Email Security

1
  • Broadcom Symantec Email SecurityAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Enterprise email security platform for cloud and on-premise deployments

Data Loss Prevention

1
  • Broadcom Data Loss PreventionAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Enterprise DLP solution for discovering, monitoring, and protecting sensitive data

Encryption

1
  • Broadcom Symantec EncryptionAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    Enterprise encryption solution for data at rest, in use, and in motion