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

Comparison Overview

Big Bazaar - Future RetailBig Bazaar - Future Retail
VS
Coles GroupColes Group
Big Bazaar - Future Retail

Big Bazaar - Future Retail

9th Floor , Future Retail Limited , , Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400083, IN

Last Update: 13/11/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.bigbazaar.com/
781/1000Fair

Big Bazaar is a household name that is used synonymously with ‘retail’ in India. We represent the requirements of a typical Indian home. Founded in 2001 by Kishore Biyani, we as a retail chain operate under the parent organisation – Future Group – that holds a significa...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:4,349
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Coles Group

Coles Group

800-838 Toorak Rd, Melbourne, 3123, AU

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://colescareers.com.au/
796/1000Fair

Coles is one of Australia’s leading retailers, with an extensive footprint of over 1,800 retail outlets nationally. We employ more than 115,000 team members, engage with more than 8,000 suppliers, and we welcome millions of customers through our store network and digita...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:12,143
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Big Bazaar - Future Retail

Big Bazaar - Future Retail

-
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
Coles Group

Coles 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 Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Big Bazaar - Future Retail in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Coles Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Big Bazaar - Future Retail (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Big Bazaar - Future Retail 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 - Coles Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Coles 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...
Big Bazaar - Future Retail

Big Bazaar - Future Retail

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Coles Group

Coles Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-94426
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in xuxueli xxl-job up to 3.5.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /jobgroup/insert. This manipulation of the argument Name causes cross site scripting. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.5)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
2.1
CVE-2026-94425
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Moore Threads MTT S80 Driver Package 340.150. The affected element is the function sub_140006F0C in the library mtdispkm64.sys of the component IOCTL Handler. The manipulation results in improper privilege management. Attacking locally is a requirement. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2
CVE-2026-94627
SUMMARY

vLLM Mooncake connector through 0.29.0 fails to properly manage GPU KV cache block ownership when concurrent child requests share a single transfer ID in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments. Attackers can trigger GPU memory exhaustion by submitting completion requests with multiple prompts, causing orphaned KV cache blocks to accumulate until process restart and eventually preventing legitimate requests from executing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
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
CVE-2026-94626
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 fails to validate the tp_size parameter in kv_transfer_params on OpenAI-compatible completion endpoints, allowing attackers to allocate unbounded memory. Attackers can supply arbitrary tp_size values in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments to exhaust memory and trigger kernel OOM-kill of the decode worker process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
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
CVE-2026-94625
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 contains a resource exhaustion vulnerability in MooncakeConnector where rejected prefill requests create ownerless transfer placeholders that are never reclaimed. Attackers can send rejected requests to exhaust sender task pools, causing valid requests to be delayed by up to 480 seconds while health checks continue returning success.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
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:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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