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

Comparison Overview

de Bijenkorfde Bijenkorf
VS
SpecsaversSpecsavers
de Bijenkorf

de Bijenkorf

Haaksbergweg 34, Amsterdam, 1101 BX, NL

Last Update: 25/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.debijenkorf.nl
779/1000Fair

Bijna iedereen herinnert zich nog de eerste keer in de Bijenkorf. De geschiedenis van het mooiste warenhuis van Nederland gaat terug tot 1870, toen op de Nieuwendijk in Amsterdam een kleine fourniturenwinkel onder de naam Magazijn de Bijenkorf werd geopend. Kunst, cultu...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:2,411
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Specsavers

Specsavers

La Villiaize, St Andrews, Global, GB, GY6 8YP

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://join.specsavers.com
788/1000Fair

Specsavers began 40 years ago with the vision of two optometrists, Doug and Mary Perkins, who set out to provide best-value eyecare to everybody. Their passion for optometry has led Specsavers to become the largest privately-owned optical group in the world, deliverin...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:27,385
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
de Bijenkorf

de Bijenkorf

-
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
Specsavers

Specsavers

-
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 Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for de Bijenkorf in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Specsavers in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - de Bijenkorf (X = Date, Y = Severity)

de Bijenkorf cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

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

Specsavers 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...
de Bijenkorf

de Bijenkorf

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Specsavers

Specsavers

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
SPE205826323

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-14776
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in SourceCodester Onlne Examination & Learning Management System 1.0. Affected by this vulnerability is the function pathinfo of the file /upload_files.php of the component Filename Extension. Performing a manipulation results in unrestricted upload. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The name of the affected product appears to have a typo in it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-05
UPDATED
Date2026-07-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-14775
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in SourceCodester Onlne Examination & Learning Management System 1.0. Affected is an unknown function of the file /process_lesson.php. Such manipulation of the argument user_id leads to unrestricted upload. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The name of the affected product appears to have a typo in it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-05
UPDATED
Date2026-07-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-14774
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in itsourcecode Hospital Management System 1.0. This impacts an unknown function of the file /paymentdischarge.php. This manipulation of the argument patientid causes sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-05
UPDATED
Date2026-07-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-14773
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in itsourcecode Hospital Management System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /payment.php. The manipulation of the argument patientid results in sql injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-05
UPDATED
Date2026-07-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-10657
SUMMARY

Zephyr's DNS resolver detects mDNS (.local) queries in dns_resolve_name_internal() (subsys/net/lib/dns/resolve.c) with memcmp(strrchr(query, '.'), ".local", 7), which always reads a fixed 7 bytes from the suffix pointer. When the resolved hostname's final label is shorter than 7 bytes (e.g. names ending in .org, .com, .net, .io, or a trailing dot), the comparison reads 1-2 bytes past the string's NUL terminator. The hostname (query) is the caller-supplied name passed through the standard getaddrinfo()/dns_get_addr_info()/dns_resolve_name() path and is influenceable by operators or remote inputs (server names from configuration, parsed URLs, or app-facing interfaces). On a tightly-sized buffer with no slack (for example a userspace getaddrinfo call where the hostname is copied with k_usermode_string_alloc_copy to exactly strlen+1 bytes), the over-read crosses the allocation boundary; if that boundary is unmapped (guard page, memory-domain boundary under MPU, or an address sanitizer) the over-read faults, causing a denial of service. The over-read bytes are never returned, so there is no information disclosure. The flaw is compiled only when CONFIG_MDNS_RESOLVER is enabled, exists since v1.10.0, and is fixed by replacing the fixed-length memcmp with a NUL-safe strcmp(ptr, ".local").

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-05
UPDATED
Date2026-07-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2