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

Comparison Overview

Asahi Group HoldingsAsahi Group Holdings
VS
Compass GroupCompass Group
Asahi Group Holdings

Asahi Group Holdings

1-23-1, Azumabashi, Sumida-ku, Tokyo, JP, 1308602

Last Update: 21/07/2026

View Profile
100/1000Critical

Asahi Group Holdings, Ltd. is a global leader offering a diverse collection of brands centered on beer, alcohol and non-alcohol beverages, and food. Our vision is to be the leader in creating shared moments full of life with great taste. Established in Japan in 1889, th...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:1,247
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2
Compass Group

Compass Group

Compass House, Chertsey, KT16 9BQ, GB

Last Update: 17/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.compass-group.com
820/1000Good

Compass Group is a global leader in food services operating in over 25 countries with around 590,000 employees worldwide and generating underlying revenues of over $46 billion for the 2025 fiscal year. Our vision is to be a world-class provider of contract food services...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:61,892
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Asahi Group Holdings

Asahi Group Holdings

-
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
Compass Group

Compass Group

-
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 and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Asahi Group Holdings has 4.17% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Compass Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Asahi Group Holdings (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Asahi Group Holdings cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Compass Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Compass Group 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...
Asahi Group Holdings

Asahi Group Holdings

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
CONDAVORASANASA1770645741
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
ASACITCGR1768389558
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
ADIHEAHARMARTHEJAG1767017696
Compass Group

Compass Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66720
SUMMARY

The GOOSE subscriber component improperly validates the UTC timestamp field in unauthenticated IEC 61850 GOOSE (EtherType 0x88B8) Layer-2 multicast messages. A specially crafted GOOSE frame containing an undersized timestamp field can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read during message processing, causing the process to crash and resulting in a denial-of-service condition.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/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
2.8
CVE-2026-66421
SUMMARY

OpenClaw Dashboard contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the administrator's browser session by injecting HTML markup into agent transcript messages processed through the sessions API. Attackers can craft a message containing inline event handler payloads such as an img tag with an onerror attribute within the 60-character rendering budget, which is stored in the session transcript and interpolated unsanitized into innerHTML on the default landing page, allowing theft of session tokens and unauthorized calls to authenticated administrative endpoints including agent instruction file modification.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/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
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66420
SUMMARY

MeshCentral 1.1.21 contains a cross-site WebSocket hijacking protection bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to hijack authenticated administrator sessions by exploiting an unconditional early return in the CheckWebServerOriginName() function within webserver.js when self-signed certificates are in use. Attackers can open cross-origin WebSocket connections to any of the twelve WebSocket endpoints, send crafted action commands to exfiltrate the server sessionKey used to sign session cookies, forge session tokens as arbitrary users, and gain full remote control of all managed devices governed by the MeshCentral instance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66369
SUMMARY

The GOOSE parser contains an off-by-one boundary-handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer-2 multicast frame on the process bus. When specific GOOSE message fields are processed, the parser advances its internal buffer position incorrectly, resulting in a heap out-of-bounds read. On affected platforms, this condition reliably terminates the subscriber process and causes a denial-of-service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/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
2.8
CVE-2026-66364
SUMMARY

The GOOSE payload parser contains a boundary handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer 2 multicast frame on the process bus. When processing specific payload fields, an attacker controlled inner element length may exceed its enclosing length, causing the parser to over read by one byte. This out-of-bounds read reliably terminates the subscriber process, resulting in a denial-of-service condition.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/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
2.8