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

Comparison Overview

Colebrook Bosson Saunders APACColebrook Bosson Saunders APAC
VS
StaplesStaples
Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC

Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC

12 Georgiana St, Docklands, 3008, AU

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
755/1000Fair

At Colebrook Bosson Saunders we strive for new ways to enhance user experience through the seamless connection of people and technology. We believe passionately in design, focusing on creating products that integrate people with technology to increase user comfort, perf...

NAICS:45321
NAICS Definition:Office Supplies and Stationery Stores
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:19
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Staples

Staples

500 Staples Drive, Framingham, 01702, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.staples.com
691/1000Weak

For nearly 40 years, Staples has been a trusted leader in delivering end-to-end workplace solutions for consumers and businesses of all sizes across a broad range of industries. The company provides a comprehensive portfolio of products, strategic solutions, and service...

NAICS:45321
NAICS Definition:Office Supplies and Stationery Stores
Employees:32,486
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC

Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC

-
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
Staples

Staples

-
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 Office Equipment Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Office Equipment Industry Avg (This Year)

Staples has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Staples (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Staples 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...
Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC

Colebrook Bosson Saunders APAC

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Staples

Staples

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
STA1775075784
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
STA23584224
🔒 Incident : Breach
STA607072725

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
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