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

Comparison Overview

AB InBev EfesAB InBev Efes
VS
KFC UK & IrelandKFC UK & Ireland
AB InBev Efes

AB InBev Efes

Fizkultury vulytsia 30, Holosiivskyi raion, Kyiv City, undefined, UA

Last Update: 13/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://abinbevefes.com.ua/
766/1000Fair

AB InBev Efes є одним з лідерів українського пивоварного ринку та спільним підприємством найбільшої у світі пивоварної компанії Anheuser-Busch InBev і найбільшої пивоварної компанії Туреччини Anadolu Efes. AB InBev Efes в Україні має три пивоварні в Чернігові, Харкові т...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:394
Subsidiaries:32
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
KFC UK & Ireland

KFC UK & Ireland

Guildford Road, Woking, Woking, GU22 7NJ , GB

Last Update: 16/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.kfc.co.uk/careers
775/1000Fair

This is KFC - home of the real ones. We come to work to be ourselves, and to make something of ourselves. We bring the graft and the laughs every day - building our own community, as we serve our original recipe chicken to the ones we’re in.   In our place, ambition gr...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:10,727
Subsidiaries:26
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AB InBev Efes

AB InBev Efes

-
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
KFC UK & Ireland

KFC UK & Ireland

-
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 Food & Beverages Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AB InBev Efes in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Food & Beverages Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for KFC UK & Ireland in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - AB InBev Efes (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AB InBev Efes cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - KFC UK & Ireland (X = Date, Y = Severity)

KFC UK & Ireland 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...
AB InBev Efes

AB InBev Efes

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
KFC UK & Ireland

KFC UK & Ireland

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-110873
SUMMARY

Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110872
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-110871
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110870
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-110869
SUMMARY

Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9