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

Comparison Overview

Bronson LaboratoriesBronson Laboratories
VS
Purpose Brands, LLCPurpose Brands, LLC
Bronson Laboratories

Bronson Laboratories

70 Commerce Drive, None, Hauppauge, NY, US, 11788

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
764/1000Fair

Bronson… Quality Vitamins, Factory Direct, Since 1960. It's clear that vitamins and nutritional supplements help people live a healthier and more vital life. But are you sure the vitamins you are taking are really doing their job? Just like anything else, there are d...

NAICS:71394
NAICS Definition:Fitness and Recreational Sports Centers
Employees:38
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Purpose Brands, LLC

Purpose Brands, LLC

111 Weir Drive, Woodbury, 55125, US

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://purposebrands.com/
743/1000Moderate

Purpose Brands, LLC provides fitness, nutrition and wellness support and services to more than 7,000 communities and millions of people around the world. We own and operate the world’s largest and most trusted portfolio of fitness, health and wellness franchise brand...

NAICS:71394
NAICS Definition:Fitness and Recreational Sports Centers
Employees:29,223
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Bronson Laboratories

Bronson Laboratories

-
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
Purpose Brands, LLC

Purpose Brands, LLC

-
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 Wellness and Fitness Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bronson Laboratories in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Wellness and Fitness Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Purpose Brands, LLC in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Bronson Laboratories (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bronson Laboratories cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Purpose Brands, LLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Purpose Brands, LLC 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...
Bronson Laboratories

Bronson Laboratories

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
BRO125072825
Purpose Brands, LLC

Purpose Brands, LLC

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
PUR3203232111425

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2