Comparison Overview

Barnes & Noble, Inc.

VS

Food Lion

Barnes & Noble, Inc.

33 E 17th St, New York, US, 10003
Last Update: 2025-11-28

Barnes & Noble proudly serves America with approximately 600 bookstores across all fifty states, and are busy opening newly designed stores in communities nationwide. We are an innovator in publishing, retail, and digital media, including our award-winning NOOK® products and an expansive collection of digital reading and entertainment content. We welcome creative, dedicated, and service-oriented team members who are passionate about being an integral part of our dynamic community and helping it thrive. Whether your expertise is in retail, merchandising, publishing, marketing, technology, or finance, we have a place for you at Barnes & Noble.

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 13,816
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Food Lion

2011 Executive Dr, Salisbury, North Carolina, US, 28147
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

Food Lion, based in Salisbury, N.C., and its 82,000 associates have a longstanding history of serving its customers and communities through 10 Southeastern and Mid-Atlantic states. Since 1957, we have been connected to the towns and cities we serve by providing an easy shopping experience anchored by a strong commitment to affordability, freshness and the communities we serve. By serving more than 10 million customers a week, our associates make sure our customers can always count on us to meet their needs. In addition, we make sure that our neighbors can count on us too. Through Food Lion Feeds, we are working to end hunger in our local communities by committing to donate 500 million meals through food donations, volunteer service and other impactful hunger-relief initiatives.

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 24,195
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/barnes-&-noble.jpeg
Barnes & Noble, Inc.
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/food-lion.jpeg
Food Lion
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Barnes & Noble, Inc.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Food Lion
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Barnes & Noble, Inc. in 2025.

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Food Lion in 2025.

Incident History — Barnes & Noble, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Barnes & Noble, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Food Lion (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Food Lion cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/barnes-&-noble.jpeg
Barnes & Noble, Inc.
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2012
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Physical Tampering (PIN Pad Devices)
Motivation: Financial Gain (Likely)
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/food-lion.jpeg
Food Lion
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Data Theft
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Both Barnes & Noble, Inc. company and Food Lion company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Food Lion company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Barnes & Noble, Inc. company.

In the current year, Food Lion company has reported more cyber incidents than Barnes & Noble, Inc. company.

Food Lion company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Barnes & Noble, Inc. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Food Lion company nor Barnes & Noble, Inc. company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Both Food Lion company and Barnes & Noble, Inc. company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither Barnes & Noble, Inc. company nor Food Lion company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Barnes & Noble, Inc. nor Food Lion holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Food Lion company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Barnes & Noble, Inc. company.

Food Lion company employs more people globally than Barnes & Noble, Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Retail.

Neither Barnes & Noble, Inc. nor Food Lion holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Barnes & Noble, Inc. nor Food Lion holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Barnes & Noble, Inc. nor Food Lion holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Barnes & Noble, Inc. nor Food Lion holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Barnes & Noble, Inc. nor Food Lion holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Barnes & Noble, Inc. nor Food Lion holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: 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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H