Comparison Overview

Coppel

VS

Frasers Group

Coppel

República 2855 pte, Culiacan, Sinaloa, 80105, MX
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 800 and 849

Coppel es una empresa mexicana con sede en la ciudad de Culiacán, que ha sido fundada en 1941. Es una cadena comercial de tiendas departamentales de ventas a través del otorgamiento de créditos con pocos requisitos, y repartos gratuitos. En la actualidad cuenta con mas de 1000 puntos de venta, distribuidos alrededor de la república Mexicana, Brasil y Argentina.

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 24,441
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Frasers Group

Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

Frasers Group started as a small store in Maidenhead in 1982 and from there, grew to become a global powerhouse. We are now a collection of the world’s most iconic brands including Sports Direct, Flannels, GAME, Jack Wills, Sofa.com, Evans Cycles, USC, and Everlast. We believe the higher the risk, the greater the reward. We’ve never been afraid to strive forward and change the way the industry operates, diversifying our portfolio and elevating stores. We’re pushing the boundaries of traditional retail environments; future-proofing our business and improving product access to create a shopping environment that will be fit for purpose for many more years to come. We’re not sitting back – there’s no room for hesitation.

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 14,684
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/coppel-sa-de-cv.jpeg
Coppel
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/frasers-group.jpeg
Frasers Group
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Coppel
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Frasers Group
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Coppel in 2025.

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Frasers Group in 2025.

Incident History — Coppel (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Coppel cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Frasers Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Frasers Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/coppel-sa-de-cv.jpeg
Coppel
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/frasers-group.jpeg
Frasers Group
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2017
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unpatched DNN platform vulnerabilities
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Coppel company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Frasers Group company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Frasers Group company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Coppel company has not reported any.

In the current year, Frasers Group company and Coppel company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Frasers Group company nor Coppel company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Frasers Group company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Coppel company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Frasers Group company nor Coppel company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Coppel company nor Frasers Group company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Coppel nor Frasers Group holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Frasers Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Coppel company.

Coppel company employs more people globally than Frasers Group company, reflecting its scale as a Retail.

Neither Coppel nor Frasers Group holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Coppel nor Frasers Group holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Coppel nor Frasers Group holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Coppel nor Frasers Group holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Coppel nor Frasers Group holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Coppel nor Frasers Group holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: 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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H