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. Veritas

Veritas

enriched
Backup as a Service

Represented by Carahsoft ↗

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

Do you work at Veritas?

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 Veritas'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 Veritas 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 8 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
  • Limited

    Operating durability

    Is this a real, durable business?

    checked 2 of 4

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

    • Headquarters location not disclosed on their site
  • 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
    • 27 rated critical
    • No public status page found
  • Limited

    Disclosure posture

    Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?

    checked 1 of 3

    How much this vendor volunteers before you have to ask.

    • 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 Veritas.

Data coverage: 13/100What 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 completeness13/100
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: 13

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.

2 detected

Integrated by: Elastio, OctoXLabs

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.

Ransomware data recovery solution with AI-based threat detection and backup. 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.

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

No positive signals detected yet across the checks completed so far.

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.

LOWMEDIUMHIGHCRITICAL200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021CVE-2021-44681 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-12-07CVE-2021-44680 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-12-07CVE-2021-44679 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-12-07CVE-2021-44678 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-12-07CVE-2021-44677 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2021-12-07CVE-2021-27878 · HIGH 8.8 · 2021-03-02CVE-2021-27877 · HIGH 8.2 · 2021-03-02CVE-2021-27876 · HIGH 8.1 · 2021-03-02CVE-2020-36169 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36168 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36167 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36166 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36165 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36164 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36163 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36162 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36161 · HIGH 8.8 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36160 · CRITICAL 9.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-36159 · MEDIUM 5.3 · 2021-01-06CVE-2020-27157 · HIGH 8.1 · 2020-10-15CVE-2020-27156 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2020-10-15CVE-2020-12877 · HIGH 7.5 · 2020-05-15CVE-2020-12876 · HIGH 7.5 · 2020-05-15CVE-2020-12875 · MEDIUM 6.3 · 2020-05-15CVE-2020-12874 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2020-05-15CVE-2019-18780 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2019-11-06CVE-2019-14418 · HIGH 8.8 · 2019-07-30CVE-2019-14417 · HIGH 7.2 · 2019-07-30CVE-2019-14416 · HIGH 7.2 · 2019-07-30CVE-2019-14415 · MEDIUM 4.8 · 2019-07-30CVE-2019-9868 · HIGH 7.2 · 2019-03-21CVE-2019-9867 · HIGH 7.2 · 2019-03-21CVE-2018-18652 · HIGH 7.2 · 2018-10-26CVE-2017-15517 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2017-11-17CVE-2017-8895 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-05-11CVE-2017-8859 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-05-10CVE-2017-8858 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-05-10CVE-2017-8857 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-05-10CVE-2017-8856 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-05-10CVE-2017-7444 · HIGH 7.8 · 2017-04-06CVE-2017-6409 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6408 · HIGH 7.0 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6407 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6406 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6405 · HIGH 7.5 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6404 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6403 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6402 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6401 · HIGH 7.8 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6400 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-03-02CVE-2017-6399 · HIGH 8.8 · 2017-03-02CVE-2016-7399 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-01-05CVE-2015-6552 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2016-05-07CVE-2015-6551 · MEDIUM 5.9 · 2016-05-07CVE-2015-6550 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2016-05-07CVE-2011-0547 · HIGH 10.0 · 2011-08-20CVE-2003-1575 · MEDIUM 4.6 · 2010-01-29CVE-2009-3027 · HIGH 10.0 · 2009-12-11CVE-2009-0207 · MEDIUM 6.8 · 2009-03-25CVE-2009-0651 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2009-02-20CVE-2008-4638 · MEDIUM 4.6 · 2008-10-21CVE-2008-3248 · MEDIUM 4.6 · 2008-10-21CVE-2008-4339 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2008-09-30CVE-2008-3703 · HIGH 10.0 · 2008-08-18CVE-2007-4516 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2008-02-22CVE-2008-0638 · HIGH 9.3 · 2008-02-22CVE-2007-5126 · HIGH 10.0 · 2007-09-27CVE-2007-2279 · HIGH 9.3 · 2007-06-04CVE-2007-1593 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2007-06-04CVE-2006-5822 · HIGH 10.0 · 2006-12-15CVE-2006-6222 · HIGH 10.0 · 2006-12-15CVE-2006-4902 · HIGH 10.0 · 2006-12-15CVE-2006-4228 · HIGH 9.0 · 2006-08-19CVE-2006-4128 · MEDIUM 6.5 · 2006-08-15CVE-2006-0990 · HIGH 9.0 · 2006-03-28CVE-2006-0989 · HIGH 9.0 · 2006-03-28CVE-2006-1298 · MEDIUM 4.6 · 2006-03-20CVE-2006-1297 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2006-03-20CVE-2005-3116 · HIGH 10.0 · 2005-11-18CVE-2005-3566 · MEDIUM 4.3 · 2005-11-16CVE-2005-2715 · HIGH 10.0 · 2005-10-13CVE-2005-2996 · HIGH 7.5 · 2005-09-21CVE-2005-2611 · HIGH 10.0 · 2005-08-17CVE-2005-2079 · HIGH 7.5 · 2005-08-02CVE-2005-2389 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2005-07-27CVE-2005-2080 · HIGH 7.5 · 2005-06-29CVE-2005-2051 · HIGH 7.5 · 2005-06-28CVE-2005-0772 · HIGH 7.5 · 2005-06-28CVE-2005-0771 · HIGH 10.0 · 2005-06-23CVE-2005-0773 · HIGH 7.5 · 2005-06-18CVE-2005-1131 · HIGH 10.0 · 2005-05-02CVE-2004-1172 · HIGH 10.0 · 2005-01-10CVE-2004-2205 · HIGH 7.2 · 2004-12-31CVE-2004-1389 · MEDIUM 6.0 · 2004-12-31CVE-2003-1361 · HIGH 10.0 · 2003-12-31CVE-2002-1817 · HIGH 7.5 · 2002-12-31CVE-2002-1117 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2002-10-04CVE-2001-0287 · LOW 2.1 · 2001-05-03CVE-2001-0107 · MEDIUM 5.0 · 2001-03-12CVE-2000-0494 · HIGH 7.2 · 2000-06-16

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-2021-44681 ↗CRITICAL 9.82021

    An issue (5 of 6) was discovered in Veritas Enterprise Vault through 14.1.2. On start-up, the Enterprise Vault application starts several services that listen on random .NET Remoting TCP ports for pos…

  • CVE-2021-44680 ↗CRITICAL 9.82021

    An issue (4 of 6) was discovered in Veritas Enterprise Vault through 14.1.2. On start-up, the Enterprise Vault application starts several services that listen on random .NET Remoting TCP ports for pos…

  • CVE-2021-44679 ↗CRITICAL 9.82021

    An issue (3 of 6) was discovered in Veritas Enterprise Vault through 14.1.2. On start-up, the Enterprise Vault application starts several services that listen on random .NET Remoting TCP ports for pos…

  • CVE-2021-44678 ↗CRITICAL 9.82021

    An issue (2 of 6) was discovered in Veritas Enterprise Vault through 14.1.2. On start-up, the Enterprise Vault application starts several services that listen on random .NET Remoting TCP ports for pos…

  • CVE-2021-44677 ↗CRITICAL 9.82021

    An issue (1 of 6) was discovered in Veritas Enterprise Vault through 14.1.2. On start-up, the Enterprise Vault application starts several services that listen on random .NET Remoting TCP ports for pos…

  • CVE-2021-27878 ↗⚠ actively exploitedHIGH 8.82021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas Backup Exec before 21.2. The communication between a client and an Agent requires successful authentication, which is typically completed over a secure TLS communica…

  • CVE-2021-27877 ↗⚠ actively exploitedHIGH 8.22021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas Backup Exec before 21.2. It supports multiple authentication schemes: SHA authentication is one of these. This authentication scheme is no longer used in current ver…

  • CVE-2021-27876 ↗⚠ actively exploitedHIGH 8.12021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas Backup Exec before 21.2. The communication between a client and an Agent requires successful authentication, which is typically completed over a secure TLS communica…

  • CVE-2020-36169 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas NetBackup through 8.3.0.1 and OpsCenter through 8.3.0.1. Processes using OpenSSL attempt to load and execute libraries from paths that do not exist by default on the…

  • CVE-2020-36168 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas Resiliency Platform 3.4 and 3.5. It leverages OpenSSL on Windows systems when using the Managed Host addon. On start-up, it loads the OpenSSL library. This library m…

  • CVE-2020-36167 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in the server in Veritas Backup Exec through 16.2, 20.6 before hotfix 298543, and 21.1 before hotfix 657517. On start-up, it loads the OpenSSL library from the Installation fol…

  • CVE-2020-36166 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas InfoScale 7.x through 7.4.2 on Windows, Storage Foundation through 6.1 on Windows, Storage Foundation HA through 6.1 on Windows, and InfoScale Operations Manager (ak…

  • CVE-2020-36165 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas Desktop and Laptop Option (DLO) before 9.4. On start-up, it loads the OpenSSL library from /ReleaseX64/ssl. This library attempts to load the /ReleaseX64/ssl/openssl…

  • CVE-2020-36164 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas Enterprise Vault through 14.0. On start-up, it loads the OpenSSL library. The OpenSSL library then attempts to load the openssl.cnf configuration file (which does no…

  • CVE-2020-36163 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas NetBackup and OpsCenter through 8.3.0.1. NetBackup processes using Strawberry Perl attempt to load and execute libraries from paths that do not exist by default on t…

  • CVE-2020-36162 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas CloudPoint before 8.3.0.1+hotfix. The CloudPoint Windows Agent leverages OpenSSL. This OpenSSL library attempts to load the \usr\local\ssl\openssl.cnf configuration …

  • CVE-2020-36161 ↗HIGH 8.82021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas APTARE 10.4 before 10.4P9 and 10.5 before 10.5P3. By default, on Windows systems, users can create directories under C:\. A low privileged user can create a director…

  • CVE-2020-36160 ↗CRITICAL 9.32021

    An issue was discovered in Veritas System Recovery before 21.2. On start-up, it loads the OpenSSL library from \usr\local\ssl. This library attempts to load the from \usr\local\ssl\openssl.cnf configu…

  • CVE-2020-36159 ↗MEDIUM 5.32021

    Veritas Desktop and Laptop Option (DLO) before 9.5 disclosed operational information on the backup processing status through a URL that did not require authentication.

  • CVE-2020-27157 ↗HIGH 8.12020

    Veritas APTARE versions prior to 10.5 included code that bypassed the normal login process when specific authentication credentials were provided to the server. An unauthenticated user could login to …

  • …and 80 more

Competitors (12)

full alternatives comparison →
AcsenseAhsay Systems CorporationArcserveArpioAvePointAxcientBarracudaCohesityCommvaultCyberSentriqDattoDruva

Products (1)

Backup as a Service

1
  • Cohesity Ransomware Data RecoveryAI-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 ↗
    Ransomware data recovery solution with AI-based threat detection and backup.