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

Comparison Overview

BelkBelk
VS
AcostaAcosta
Belk

Belk

2801 W Tyvola Rd, Charlotte, 28217, US

Last Update: 13/09/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://www.belkcareers.com/
687/1000Weak

Charlotte-based Belk, Inc., a privately-owned department store, began when William Henry Belk opened his first store in 1888 with his brother, Dr. John Belk, joining as a partner. What started as two brothers in business has now grown into a legacy of selling great prod...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:12,732
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Acosta

Acosta

6651 Gate Pkwy, Jacksonville, Florida, US, 32256

Last Update: 18/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.acosta.com
792/1000Fair

Acosta brings simplicity to retail sales. We act as a catalyst to boldly connect brands, retailers and consumers, fueling growth and building long-term value throughout North America and Europe. We are deeply embedded in every corner of the retail industry, strengtheni...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:13,353
Subsidiaries:26
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Belk

Belk

-
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
Acosta

Acosta

-
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 Belk in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Acosta in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Belk (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Belk cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

Acosta 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...
Belk

Belk

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
BELMAR1770616665
Acosta

Acosta

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-84411
SUMMARY

The web management service in affected RouterOS versions contains an integer underflow in its HTTP request body handling that is reachable before authentication. This can be leveraged by an unauthenticated network attacker to achieve arbitrary code execution as root, or to cause a denial of service, using a single crafted request.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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
3.9
CVE-2026-105051
SUMMARY

Denuvo Anti-Tamper through 2026-03-04 allows bypass of a hypervisor presence check via CPUID interception (SimpleSvm.sys on AMD; hyperkd.sys and hyperhv.dll on Intel).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 1.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 1.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
0.5
CVE-2026-105050
SUMMARY

PeaZip before 11.3.0, in a non-default configuration, is vulnerable to OS command injection via a filename in an archive because "quotation character already used in the string" is mishandled.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-105049
SUMMARY

Zilliz Attu before 3.0.0 has a Playground feature that does not require authentication for proxying arbitrary HTTP and HTTPS requests to URLs on the public internet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105048
SUMMARY

The Playground feature of Zilliz Attu before 3.0.0 allows SSRF (proxying of requests to private IP addresses).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2