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

Comparison Overview

Carlsberg Shared ServicesCarlsberg Shared Services
VS
Perfetti Van MellePerfetti Van Melle
Carlsberg Shared Services

Carlsberg Shared Services

ul. Małe Garbary 9, Poznań, undefined, 61-756, PL

Last Update: 30/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://carlsberggroup.com/
764/1000Fair

Carlsberg Shared Services provides services to other companies within the Carlsberg Group. Our focus has always been Accounting, but together with the continuous growth of our business, we are now becoming a business center, providing also Planning and Financial Control...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:373
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Perfetti Van Melle

Perfetti Van Melle

Stationsplein ZW 997, SCHIPHOL OOST, 1117 CE, NL

Last Update: 14/09/2026

View Profile
798/1000Fair

Perfetti Van Melle is a privately owned company, producing and distributing candies and chewing gums in more than 150 countries worldwide. Employing over 17.000 people and operating 37 companies throughout the world, Perfetti Van Melle has a true global reach: it is p...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:11,469
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Carlsberg Shared Services

Carlsberg Shared Services

-
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
Perfetti Van Melle

Perfetti Van Melle

-
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 Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Carlsberg Shared Services in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Perfetti Van Melle in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Carlsberg Shared Services (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Carlsberg Shared Services cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Perfetti Van Melle (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Perfetti Van Melle 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...
Carlsberg Shared Services

Carlsberg Shared Services

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Perfetti Van Melle

Perfetti Van Melle

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-110873
SUMMARY

Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110872
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/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
2.2
CVE-2026-110871
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
2.8
CVE-2026-110870
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
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:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-110869
SUMMARY

Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
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