Comparison Overview

Daiwa House Texas Inc.

VS

Coldwell Banker Realty

Daiwa House Texas Inc.

222 WEST LAS COLINAS BLVD, Irving, Texas 75039, US
Last Update: 2025-11-26

Daiwa House Texas Inc. is a subsidiary of publicly traded Daiwa House Group. We were founded in Japan in 1966. We are rated number 342 on the 2018 Fortune Global 500 list, and our operations span 20 countries. We have partnerships with Real Estate firms in Dallas, Chicago, Boston, Seattle, Washington D.C., Houston, Phoenix, Nashville and New York in the multi-family sector. Additionally Daiwa House has acquired home builders on the East and West Coast to deliver single-family homes. Daiwa House Group and Daiwa House Texas aim to partner with developers and cities to provide Americans with superior places to live across the United States.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 31
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Coldwell Banker Realty

175 Park Avenue, Madison, NJ, US, 07940
Last Update: 2025-11-24

Coldwell Banker Realty is one of the nation’s largest real estate brokerages operating in 50 markets in the United States. Powered by a network of approximately 55,000 independent real estate agents and 600 offices, Coldwell Banker Realty, a subsidiary of Anywhere Real Estate Inc. (NYSE:HOUS), operates the company-owned real estate brokerage offices that are part of the worldwide Coldwell Banker Real Estate LLC brand. For more information, visit www.ColdwellBankerHomes.com.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 44,799
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/daiwa-house-texas-inc..jpeg
Daiwa House Texas Inc.
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/cbrealty.jpeg
Coldwell Banker Realty
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
Daiwa House Texas Inc.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Coldwell Banker Realty
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Real Estate Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Daiwa House Texas Inc. in 2025.

Incidents vs Real Estate Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Coldwell Banker Realty in 2025.

Incident History — Daiwa House Texas Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Daiwa House Texas Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Coldwell Banker Realty (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Coldwell Banker Realty cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/daiwa-house-texas-inc..jpeg
Daiwa House Texas Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cbrealty.jpeg
Coldwell Banker Realty
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Daiwa House Texas Inc. company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Coldwell Banker Realty company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Coldwell Banker Realty company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Daiwa House Texas Inc. company.

In the current year, Coldwell Banker Realty company and Daiwa House Texas Inc. company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Coldwell Banker Realty company nor Daiwa House Texas Inc. company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Coldwell Banker Realty company nor Daiwa House Texas Inc. company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Coldwell Banker Realty company nor Daiwa House Texas Inc. company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Daiwa House Texas Inc. company nor Coldwell Banker Realty company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Daiwa House Texas Inc. nor Coldwell Banker Realty holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Coldwell Banker Realty company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Daiwa House Texas Inc. company.

Coldwell Banker Realty company employs more people globally than Daiwa House Texas Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Real Estate.

Neither Daiwa House Texas Inc. nor Coldwell Banker Realty holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Daiwa House Texas Inc. nor Coldwell Banker Realty holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Daiwa House Texas Inc. nor Coldwell Banker Realty holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Daiwa House Texas Inc. nor Coldwell Banker Realty holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Daiwa House Texas Inc. nor Coldwell Banker Realty holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Daiwa House Texas Inc. nor Coldwell Banker Realty 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