Comparison Overview

Chicken Shack

VS

Papa Johns

Chicken Shack

undefined, undefined, undefined, undefined, US
Last Update: 2025-05-05 (UTC)
Between 900 and 1000

Excellent

Founded in 1956, Chicken Shack is the place to go to get the best Chicken, Ribs and Seafood in the Metro Detroit area. Stop in and try our delicious food, and remember, "When you think Chicken, think Chicken Shack."

NAICS: 7225
NAICS Definition: Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees: 209
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Papa Johns

788 Circle 75 Pkwy SE Atlanta, Georgia 30339, US
Last Update: 2025-06-02 (UTC)

Excellent

Between 900 and 1000

Papa Johns seeks people who have an entrepreneurial spirit and share our philosophy for success. Hands-on training, a clean and safe work environment, quality business practices, advancement opportunities and meaningful work combine to produce not only the best pizza, but also the best team members! Better Opportunities. Better People! At Papa Johns we call ourselves team members instead of employees because we believe it is only through a strong team we can produce the best experience for our customers. Whether at our corporate campus, distribution centers, our restaurants, or located internationally; Papa Johns has a variety of positions for talented and passionate people. Papa Johns is an equal opportunity employer and provides excellent career opportunities for our entire team. Our company philosophies of promote from within and rewards based on performance are important elements of our company culture.

NAICS: 7225
NAICS Definition: Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees: 10,001+
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/chicken-shack.jpeg
Chicken Shack
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/papajohns.jpeg
Papa Johns
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
Chicken Shack
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Papa Johns
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Chicken Shack in 2025.

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Papa Johns in 2025.

Incident History โ€” Chicken Shack (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chicken Shack cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Papa Johns (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Papa Johns cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chicken-shack.jpeg
Chicken Shack
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/papajohns.jpeg
Papa Johns
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Chicken Shack company and Papa Johns company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Papa Johns company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Chicken Shack company.

In the current year, Papa Johns company and Chicken Shack company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Papa Johns company nor Chicken Shack company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Papa Johns company nor Chicken Shack company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Papa Johns company nor Chicken Shack company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Chicken Shack company nor Papa Johns company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Chicken Shack company nor Papa Johns company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Chicken Shack company employs more people globally than Papa Johns company, reflecting its scale as a Restaurants.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Formbricks is an open source qualtrics alternative. Prior to version 4.0.1, Formbricks is missing JWT signature verification. This vulnerability stems from a token validation routine that only decodes JWTs (jwt.decode) without verifying their signatures. Both the email verification token login path and the password reset server action use the same validator, which does not check the tokenโ€™s signature, expiration, issuer, or audience. If an attacker learns the victimโ€™s actual user.id, they can craft an arbitrary JWT with an alg: "none" header and use it to authenticate and reset the victimโ€™s password. This issue has been patched in version 4.0.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

Apollo Studio Embeddable Explorer & Embeddable Sandbox are website embeddable software solutions from Apollo GraphQL. Prior to Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3, a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability was identified. The vulnerability arises from missing origin validation in the client-side code that handles window.postMessage events. A malicious website can send forged messages to the embedding page, causing the victimโ€™s browser to execute arbitrary GraphQL queries or mutations against their GraphQL server while authenticated with the victimโ€™s cookies. This issue has been patched in Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /consulta-dispensas. Such manipulation leads to improper authorization. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
Description

A weakness has been identified in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected is an unknown function of the file /module/Api/aluno. This manipulation of the argument aluno_id causes improper authorization. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
Description

A security flaw has been discovered in Tencent WeKnora 0.1.0. This impacts the function testEmbeddingModel of the file /api/v1/initialization/embedding/test. The manipulation of the argument baseUrl results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component. The vendor responds: "We have confirmed that the issue mentioned in the report does not exist in the latest releases".

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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