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

Comparison Overview

BinDawood HoldingBinDawood Holding
VS
RD SaúdeRD Saúde
BinDawood Holding

BinDawood Holding

Madinah Road, Jeddah, 51190, SA

Last Update: 31/05/2026

View Profile
711/1000Moderate

BinDawood Holding (Listed at Saudi Exchange in 2020 under the ticker of 4161), a retail conglomerate that focuses on information technology and retail solutions, it capitalizes on investment opportunities, driving long-term growth. Driven by a vision for sustained growt...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:1,462
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
RD Saúde

RD Saúde

Avenida Corifeu de Azevedo Marques 3097, São Paulo, BR

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://rdsaude.com.br/
812/1000Good

Somos a RD Saúde, um ecossistema de saúde integral, com mais de 3 mil farmácias em todo o Brasil e negócios em saúde que dividem o mesmo propósito: contribuir para uma sociedade mais saudável. Nossa jornada começou em novembro de 2011, fruto da união entre Droga Raia e ...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:34,747
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
BinDawood Holding

BinDawood Holding

-
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
RD Saúde

RD Saúde

-
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)

BinDawood Holding has 45.05% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for RD Saúde in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - BinDawood Holding (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BinDawood Holding cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - RD Saúde (X = Date, Y = Severity)

RD Saúde 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...
BinDawood Holding

BinDawood Holding

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
BIN1780208708
RD Saúde

RD Saúde

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-63261
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) in Kibana can lead to denial of service via Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130). A low-privileged authenticated user can send a specially crafted request to a Kibana machine learning feature, causing the server to exhaust available memory and become unavailable to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63260
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) in Kibana can lead to denial of service via Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130). An authenticated attacker with low-privilege access can trigger a denial of service condition in Kibana by sending a specially crafted, oversized request payload. Processing this user-supplied input requires resource-intensive memory allocation that can exhaust the available heap memory in the Kibana process, causing it to crash and become unavailable to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63259
SUMMARY

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639) in Kibana can lead to information disclosure via user-supplied identifiers that reference scheduled query result data from Kibana Spaces the requester is not authorized to access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63145
SUMMARY

Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to integrity compromise of Machine Learning audit and notification records via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). A vulnerability exists in Kibana's Machine Learning functionality where a Machine Learning management endpoint performs an insufficient authorization check. The endpoint validates only a coarse privilege level but does not verify that the requesting user has access to the specific Machine Learning job or notification resources provided in the request. As a result, a low-privileged user with Machine Learning access in any Kibana space can manipulate Machine Learning audit and notification records for arbitrary jobs—including jobs in other spaces or belonging to other users—by leveraging Kibana's internally elevated credentials to write to restricted Machine Learning system indices that the user cannot access directly.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63144
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Recursion (CWE-674) in Elasticsearch can lead to denial of service via a specially crafted search request submitted by a low-privileged authenticated user. A user with read-level index access can submit a request that triggers unbounded recursive processing within the Elasticsearch query evaluation component, causing a fatal error that terminates the affected node. In single-node deployments, this results in complete service outage; in multi-node clusters, it causes repeated node restarts and sustained availability degradation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8