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

Comparison Overview

Checkers Food ServicesCheckers Food Services
VS
HMSHostHMSHost
Checkers Food Services

Checkers Food Services

Corner of Old Paarl and Kruis Road, Cape Town, Western Cape, 7560, ZA

Last Update: 01/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.checkersfs.co.za
768/1000Fair

If you are looking for better prices on bigger stocks with higher quality choose Checkers Food Services. Our world-class offering for caterers and restaurateurs are specially tailored to save you time & money, improve cash flow and reduce wastage - making us a leading ...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:1,807
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
HMSHost

HMSHost

US

Last Update: 14/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.hmshost.com
781/1000Fair

HMSHost is recognized by the industry as the leader in travel dining with awards such as Restaurateur with the Highest Regard for Customer Service and Best Brand Restaurateur for Shake Shack by Airport Experience News. USA Today 10Best Readers’ Choice Travel Awards gave...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:10,256
Subsidiaries:14
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Checkers Food Services

Checkers Food 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
HMSHost

HMSHost

-
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 Checkers Food Services in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for HMSHost in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Checkers Food Services (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Checkers Food Services cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

HMSHost 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...
Checkers Food Services

Checkers Food Services

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
HMSHost

HMSHost

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-103761
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a memory exhaustion vulnerability in TransferMetadata::receivePeerNotify that allows unauthenticated attackers to grow process memory without limit. Attackers can repeatedly send notify frames up to 1 MB to the handshake RPC port, filling the uncapped notifys vector until the out-of-memory killer terminates the engine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
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
CVE-2026-103760
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a denial of service vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to block the handshake daemon by never reading replies. Attackers can send a Metadata request to the handshake RPC port and stall SocketHandShakePlugin's single listener thread in writeFully(), breaking all subsequent handshakes, metadata fetches, notify and probe requests.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
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-2025-71427
SUMMARY

Office-PowerPoint-MCP-Server through 2.0.7 contains a path traversal vulnerability that allows MCP callers to write and read files outside the working directory by supplying absolute paths or ../ sequences. Attackers can steer an AI agent via prompt injection to abuse save_presentation, open_presentation, or manage_image output_path to overwrite any server-writable file or load external files.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86344
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in 389-ds-base. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a complete LDAP operation followed by the first bytes of an incomplete LDAPMessage on the same connection, causing the server to hand that connection to a second worker thread before the first worker's result is flushed. The second worker blocks until nsslapd-ioblocktimeout while holding the connection mutex, preventing delivery of the completed operation's result. Repeating this across a small number of connections proportional to the configured worker-thread pool size exhausts the entire pool under default configuration, denying service to all clients (anonymous and authenticated, plaintext and TLS) for as long as the attacker maintains the connections.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-71454
SUMMARY

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') vulnerability in CWE-79 - Cross-site Scripting CAPEC-63 allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). This issue affects CAPEC-63: before 3.0b63.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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