Comparison Overview

Brown-Forman

VS

Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits

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

Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits

Miami, None, Miami, Florida, US, 33169
Last Update: 2025-11-20

Southern Glazer’s Wine & Spirits is the world’s pre-eminent distributor of beverage alcohol, and proud to be a multi-generational, family-owned company. We have operations in 47 states and Canada. We offer an array of careers focused on delivering a captivating and rewarding experience. We challenge our colleagues every step of the way and provide them with tools to grow, succeed and accomplish their personal and professional goals. Together, we can deliver the highest quality service to each of our customers and put you on the career path you’ve been looking for. To learn more about our company and career opportunities, please visit one of the following sites: Corporate Information: www.southernglazers.com Facebook.com/SouthernGlazers Twitter @sgwinespirits Instagram @sgwinespirits Recruitment Information: www.southernglazers.com/careers Facebook.com/southernglazerswineandspiritsjobs/ Instagram.com/sgwinespiritscareers/ X/Twitter @SGWSCareers

NAICS: 3121
NAICS Definition: Beverage Manufacturing
Employees: 16,829
Subsidiaries: 0
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/southern-wine-&-spirits.jpeg
Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits
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
Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits
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 Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits in 2025.

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

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

Incident History — Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits 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/southern-wine-&-spirits.jpeg
Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits 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 Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits company has not reported any.

In the current year, Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits company and Brown-Forman company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Brown-Forman company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Brown-Forman company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Brown-Forman company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Brown-Forman company nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Brown-Forman company nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits company employs more people globally than Brown-Forman company, reflecting its scale as a Beverage Manufacturing.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Brown-Forman nor Southern Glazer's Wine & Spirits 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