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

Comparison Overview

Acosta BentonvilleAcosta Bentonville
VS
The TJX Companies, Inc.The TJX Companies, Inc.
Acosta Bentonville

Acosta Bentonville

4204 S Pinnacle Hills Pkwy, Rogers, Arkansas, 72758, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://acosta.com/
752/1000Fair

Acosta's experts stand at the forefront of retail, crafting headquarter selling and omnichannel growth strategies that enable leading brands throughout North America and Europe to excel in their categories. Since 1927, Acosta has cultivated trusted relationships and mas...

NAICS:452
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:13
Subsidiaries:26
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
The TJX Companies, Inc.

The TJX Companies, Inc.

770 Cochituate Road, Framingham, 01701, US

Last Update: 02/10/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://jobs.tjx.com/
845/1000Good

TJX is the leading off-price apparel and home fashions retailer in the U.S. and worldwide, with four global home offices, seven brands, nearly 4,700 stores in nine countries, and five distinctive branded e-commerce sites. As Associates, we make a difference with our con...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:54,102
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Acosta Bentonville

Acosta Bentonville

-
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
The TJX Companies, Inc.

The TJX Companies, Inc.

-
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 Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Acosta Bentonville in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The TJX Companies, Inc. in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Acosta Bentonville (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Acosta Bentonville cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - The TJX Companies, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The TJX Companies, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Acosta Bentonville

Acosta Bentonville

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
The TJX Companies, Inc.

The TJX Companies, Inc.

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA