Comparison Overview

Brown-Forman

VS

Pernod Ricard

Brown-Forman

850 Dixie Hwy, None, Louisville, KY, US, 40210
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

Brown‑Forman Corporation has been building exceptional spirits brands for more than 150​ years, responsibly upholding our founding promise of “Nothing Better in the Market.” Our portfolio of premium brands includes the Jack Daniel’s Family of Brands, Woodford Reserve,​ Herradura, el Jimador, Korbel, New Mix, Old Forester, The Glendronach, Glenglassaugh,​ Benriach, Diplomático Rum, Chambord, Gin Mare, Fords Gin, Slane, and Coopers’ Craft. With a​ team of approximately 5,000 employees worldwide, we proudly share our passion for premium​ beverages in more than 170 countries.

NAICS: 3121
NAICS Definition: Beverage Manufacturing
Employees: 4,646
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Pernod Ricard

5 cour Paul Ricard, None, Paris, Ile-de-France, FR, 75008
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 800 and 849

Pernod Ricard is a convivial, responsible and successful global wine and spirits group and the #1 premium spirits organisation in the world. The Group represents 240 premium brands available in more than 160 countries. We are 18,500 exceptionally talented people worldwide with our own salesforce in 73 countries. Our portfolio is one of the most comprehensive in the market with every major category of wine and spirits, providing Pernod Ricard with a unique competitive advantage. To keep growing our business, transforming our industry and making a positive impact on the world, we believe in the power of human connection. Creating ‘convivialité’ is our business and our raison d’être. As ‘créateurs de convivialité’, our purpose is to turn every social interaction into a genuine, friendly and responsible experience of sharing. We believe there can be no convivialité with excess and strive to be sustainable and responsible at every step, from grain to glass. You must be of legal drinking age to follow and only share with others of age. Enjoy our brands responsibly. UGC policy: https://bit.ly/41XEYbx

NAICS: 3121
NAICS Definition: Beverage Manufacturing
Employees: 19,581
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/brown-forman.jpeg
Brown-Forman
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/pernod-ricard.jpeg
Pernod Ricard
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
Brown-Forman
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Pernod Ricard
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Beverage Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Brown-Forman in 2025.

Incidents vs Beverage Manufacturing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Pernod Ricard in 2025.

Incident History — Brown-Forman (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Brown-Forman cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Pernod Ricard (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pernod Ricard cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/brown-forman.jpeg
Brown-Forman
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2021
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2020
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2020
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pernod-ricard.jpeg
Pernod Ricard
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Pernod Ricard company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Brown-Forman company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Brown-Forman company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Pernod Ricard company has not reported any.

In the current year, Pernod Ricard company and Brown-Forman company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Brown-Forman company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Pernod Ricard company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Brown-Forman company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Pernod Ricard company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Brown-Forman company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Pernod Ricard company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Brown-Forman company nor Pernod Ricard company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Pernod Ricard holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Pernod Ricard company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Brown-Forman company.

Pernod Ricard company employs more people globally than Brown-Forman company, reflecting its scale as a Beverage Manufacturing.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Pernod Ricard holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Pernod Ricard holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Pernod Ricard holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Pernod Ricard holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Pernod Ricard holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Pernod Ricard 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