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
TargetTarget
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
Target

Target

1000 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, 55403, US

Last Update: 06/05/2026

View Profile
733/1000Moderate

Target is one of the world’s most recognized brands — and one of America’s leading retailers — known for bringing joy to everyday life. We create meaningful experiences for our guests by combining value, inspiration and innovation in ways no one else can. Beyond our sto...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:173,307
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
2

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
Target

Target

-
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)

Target has 2.91% fewer 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 - Target (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Target 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.
Target

Target

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
TAR1768244770
🔒 Incident : Breach
TARWEG1777381148
🔒 Incident : Breach
WEGTAR1778027645

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1