Comparison Overview

Dhanani Group Inc

VS

The HEINEKEN Company

Dhanani Group Inc

None
Last Update: 2026-01-22
View Profile
Between 600 and 649
https://dhananigroupinc.com/

Starting in the gas and convenience store business in 1976, the Dhanani Group became a franchisee for Burger King in 1994 with their first co-branded restaurant in Houston, Texas. The Sugar Land, Texas-based company is now one of the nation’s top QSR franchisees for Burger King Corporation, Pizza Huts and more.

NAICS: 722
NAICS Definition: Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees: 43
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1
View Profile

The HEINEKEN Company

Tweede Weteringsplantsoen 21, 1017 ZD, Amsterdam, NL
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 750 and 799
http://www.theHEINEKENcompany.com

HEINEKEN - the world's most international brewer. It is the leading developer and marketer of premium beer and cider brands. Led by the Heineken® brand, the Group has a portfolio of more than 500 international, regional, local, and speciality beers and ciders. We are committed to innovation, long-term brand investment, disciplined sales execution and focused cost management. Through our "Brew a Better World"​ strategy, sustainability is embedded in the business and delivers value for all stakeholders. HEINEKEN has a well-balanced geographic footprint with leadership positions in both developed and developing markets. We employ over 85,000 employees and operate breweries, malteries, cider plants and other production facilities in more than 70 countries. Stay informed: https://www.theheinekencompany.com/newsroom Please enjoy our brands responsibly and only share our posts with those who are of legal drinking age.

NAICS: 722
NAICS Definition: Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees: 42,812
Subsidiaries: 23
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dhanani-group-inc.jpeg
Dhanani Group 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/heineken.jpeg
The HEINEKEN Company
—
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
Dhanani Group Inc
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
The HEINEKEN Company
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Food and Beverage Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Dhanani Group Inc in 2026.

Incidents vs Food and Beverage Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The HEINEKEN Company in 2026.

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

Dhanani Group Inc cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — The HEINEKEN Company (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The HEINEKEN Company cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dhanani-group-inc.jpeg
Dhanani Group Inc
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Phishing
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 1/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/heineken.jpeg
The HEINEKEN Company
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Stolen Laptop
Blog: Blog

FAQ

The HEINEKEN Company company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Dhanani Group Inc company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Dhanani Group Inc company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to The HEINEKEN Company company.

In the current year, The HEINEKEN Company company and Dhanani Group Inc company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither The HEINEKEN Company company nor Dhanani Group Inc company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both The HEINEKEN Company company and Dhanani Group Inc company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither The HEINEKEN Company company nor Dhanani Group Inc company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Dhanani Group Inc company nor The HEINEKEN Company company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Dhanani Group Inc nor The HEINEKEN Company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

The HEINEKEN Company company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Dhanani Group Inc company.

The HEINEKEN Company company employs more people globally than Dhanani Group Inc company, reflecting its scale as a Food and Beverage Services.

Neither Dhanani Group Inc nor The HEINEKEN Company holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Dhanani Group Inc nor The HEINEKEN Company holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Dhanani Group Inc nor The HEINEKEN Company holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Dhanani Group Inc nor The HEINEKEN Company holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Dhanani Group Inc nor The HEINEKEN Company holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Dhanani Group Inc nor The HEINEKEN Company holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper validation of specified type of input in M365 Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
References
Description

Moonraker is a Python web server providing API access to Klipper 3D printing firmware. In versions 0.9.3 and below, instances configured with the "ldap" component enabled are vulnerable to LDAP search filter injection techniques via the login endpoint. The 401 error response message can be used to determine whether or not a search was successful, allowing for brute force methods to discover LDAP entries on the server such as user IDs and user attributes. This issue has been fixed in version 0.10.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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
References
Description

Runtipi is a Docker-based, personal homeserver orchestrator that facilitates multiple services on a single server. Versions 3.7.0 and above allow an authenticated user to execute arbitrary system commands on the host server by injecting shell metacharacters into backup filenames. The BackupManager fails to sanitize the filenames of uploaded backups. The system persists user-uploaded files directly to the host filesystem using the raw originalname provided in the request. This allows an attacker to stage a file containing shell metacharacters (e.g., $(id).tar.gz) at a predictable path, which is later referenced during the restore process. The successful storage of the file is what allows the subsequent restore command to reference and execute it. This issue has been fixed in version 4.7.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References