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

Comparison Overview

Claim Jumper RestaurantsClaim Jumper Restaurants
VS
Wingstop Restaurants Inc.Wingstop Restaurants Inc.
Claim Jumper Restaurants

Claim Jumper Restaurants

2300 S Casino Dr, Laughlin, NV, 89029, US

Last Update: 27/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.claimjumper.com/
766/1000Fair

Our saloons are a comfortable gathering place to relax after a day at work, to catch a game or share an appetizer with friends. When you step inside a Claim Jumper you will discover an environment that is warm and comfortable. The interiors of our restaurants feature h...

NAICS:7225
NAICS Definition:Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees:624
Subsidiaries:10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Wingstop Restaurants Inc.

Wingstop Restaurants Inc.

2801 N Central Expy, Dallas, 75204, US

Last Update: 07/05/2026

View Profile
777/1000Fair

Sure, we’re The Wing Experts, but it’s our flavor that defines us. You taste it in our 12 signature sauces, you see it through our bold TV commercials, and you feel it when you walk through our doors. It’s what we like to call a flavor experience, and since the opening ...

NAICS:7225
NAICS Definition:Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees:14,747
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Claim Jumper Restaurants

Claim Jumper Restaurants

-
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
Wingstop Restaurants Inc.

Wingstop Restaurants Inc.

-
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 Restaurants Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Claim Jumper Restaurants in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Wingstop Restaurants Inc. in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Claim Jumper Restaurants (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Claim Jumper Restaurants 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 - Wingstop Restaurants Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Wingstop Restaurants Inc. 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...
Claim Jumper Restaurants

Claim Jumper Restaurants

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Wingstop Restaurants Inc.

Wingstop Restaurants Inc.

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2