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

Comparison Overview

DICK'S Sporting GoodsDICK'S Sporting Goods
VS
Marks and SpencerMarks and Spencer
DICK'S Sporting Goods

DICK'S Sporting Goods

345 Court Street, Coraopolis, PA, US, 15108

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
808/1000Good

YOU LIVE AND BREATHE SPORTS. SO DO WE. In work and in life. On the field, the court or the ice. Nothing wins like a commitment to excellence; to your team and your goals. At DICK’S Sporting Goods, it’s this kind of thinking that inspires our mission. Our culture is t...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:34,032
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Marks and Spencer

Marks and Spencer

Waterside House, London, W2 1NW, GB

Last Update: 02/05/2026

View Profile
100/1000Critical

At M&S, we're dedicated to being the most trusted retailer, prioritising quality and delivering value. Every day, we bring the magic of M&S to our customers, whenever, wherever and however they want to shop with us. For over a century, we've set the standard, doing the ...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:41,277
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
5
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
DICK'S Sporting Goods

DICK'S Sporting Goods

-
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
Marks and Spencer

Marks and Spencer

-
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 DICK'S Sporting Goods in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

Marks and Spencer has 358.72% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - DICK'S Sporting Goods (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DICK'S Sporting Goods 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 - Marks and Spencer (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Marks and Spencer 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...
DICK'S Sporting Goods

DICK'S Sporting Goods

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Marks and Spencer

Marks and Spencer

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
MARVEN1777695899
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MARBYBCRO1777746530
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MAR1777213657

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-44654
SUMMARY

LibreChat is an enhanced ChatGPT clone that supports multiple AI providers. In versions up to and including 0.8.3, a shared-agent editor can delete file records through `DELETE /api/files` that the owner has reused across multiple agents. The deletion removes the file globally — not just from the shared agent — breaking the owner's other private agents that reference the same `file_id`. The private agent retains a stale `file_id` reference that no longer resolves. A shared-agent editor can destroy files that the owner uses across multiple agents. The owner's private agents — which the attacker has no access to — break silently with stale `file_id` references. This is a cross-agent integrity violation: editing access to one agent should not affect another. Version 0.8.4 contains a patch.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-44653
SUMMARY

LibreChat is an enhanced ChatGPT clone that supports multiple AI providers. In versions up to and including 0.8.3, users with only `VIEW` access to an MCP server can retrieve the server's decrypted admin-managed secrets through `GET /api/mcp/servers` and `GET /api/mcp/servers/:serverName`. The returned config includes plaintext values for `apiKey.key` and `oauth.client_secret`. This allows viewers of a shared MCP server to exfiltrate the underlying provider credentials. Version 0.8..4 contains a patch. Other remediations include: never returning decrypted admin-managed secrets to non-owners; redacting apiKey.key and oauth.client_secret from all API responses consider returning only boolean presence indicators for secrets, similar to the auth-values route pattern; and, if owners need to edit configs without re-entering secrets, preserving secrets server-side and returning placeholders instead of plaintext.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-42507
SUMMARY

When returning errors, functions in the net/textproto package would include its input as part of the error. This might allow an attacker to inject misleading content to errors that are printed or logged.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-42504
SUMMARY

Decoding a maliciously-crafted MIME header containing many invalid encoded-words can consume excessive CPU.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-41412
SUMMARY

alf.io is an open source ticket reservation system for conferences, trade shows, workshops, and meetups. Prior to version 2.0-M5-2606, the alf.io extension sandbox injects a fully-functional HTTP client (`simpleHttpClient`) into every extension script's scope. The `postFileAndSaveResponse()` method accepts an arbitrary filesystem path as its `file` parameter and reads the file contents using `new FileInputStream(file)` with no path validation, directory restriction, or allowlist. A malicious extension script can read any file accessible to the JVM process user and exfiltrate it to an attacker-controlled server via HTTP POST. Version 2.0-M5-2606 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.2