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

Comparison Overview

COSCOS
VS
Under ArmourUnder Armour
COS

COS

1 New Oxford Street, London, England, undefined, GB

Last Update: 19/03/2026

View Profile

COS offers a wardrobe of ready-to-wear and accessories for a life well dressed. Rooted in luxury design and compelling fashion movements, the collection pays meticulous attention to sustainable craftsmanship, quality and a superior colour palette that transcends time. T...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:4,132
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Under Armour

Under Armour

101 Performance Dr, Baltimore, 21230, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
100/1000Critical

Our Belief: WE USE THE POWER OF SPORTS TO EXPAND EVERY PLAYING FIELD. Our Obsession: WE ARE OBSESSED WITH ATHLETES WHO STRIVE FOR MORE – IN SPORTS, IN LIFE, AND IN THE WORLD. Our Mission: TO INSPIRE ATHLETES WITH INNOVATIVE PERFORMANCE AND DESIGN SOLUTIONS THEY CAN’T LI...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:13,030
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
COS

COS

-
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
Under Armour

Under Armour

-
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 Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for COS in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

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

Incidents

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

COS 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 - Under Armour (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Under Armour 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...
COS

COS

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Under Armour

Under Armour

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
UND1769117511
🔒 Incident : Breach
UND1769174822
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
UND3492734111825

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67866
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67863
SUMMARY

In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
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-2026-19026
SUMMARY

H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-19025
SUMMARY

H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA