Comparison Overview

Dillard's Inc.

VS

Spencer's

Dillard's Inc.

1600 Cantrell Rd., Little Rock, AR, 72201, US
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

Dillard's, Inc. ranks among the nation's largest fashion apparel and home furnishings retailers with annual revenues exceeding $6.1 billion. The Company focuses on delivering maximum fashion and value to its shoppers by offering compelling apparel and home selections complemented by exceptional customer care. Dillard's stores offer a broad selection of merchandise and feature products from both national and exclusive brand sources. The Company operates nearly 300 Dillard's locations spanning 29 states, all with one nameplate - Dillard's.

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 18,751
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Spencer's

6826 Black Horse Pike, Egg Harbor Township, NJ, US, 08234
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 650 and 699

We are a lifestyle retail company with two unique brands located throughout the U.S., Canada, and online. Our Home Office is located just minutes from the beach in Egg Harbor Township, NJ. At Spencer's and Spirit Halloween, we do the right thing always - integrity, fairness, respect, and transparency are our foundation. You will find our culture to be inclusive, passionate, resilient, and one that values differences and embraces all. We are leaders and owners of our business success. Whether it’s developing new and exclusive costumes, quality testing products, or implementing technology solutions, our teams understand the value of working collaboratively to embrace change through innovation, curiosity, and thoughtfulness. We are authentic, professional providers of fun, focused on building a Great Place to Work For All by staying true to our mission: “Life’s A Party, We’re Makin’ It Fun!” and “So Much Fun It’s Scary!”

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 12,684
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dillards.jpeg
Dillard's 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/spencer-gifts.jpeg
Spencer's
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
Dillard's Inc.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Spencer's
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Dillard's Inc. in 2025.

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Spencer's in 2025.

Incident History — Dillard's Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Dillard's Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Spencer's (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Spencer's cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dillards.jpeg
Dillard's Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/spencer-gifts.jpeg
Spencer's
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Dillard's Inc. company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Spencer's company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Spencer's company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Dillard's Inc. company has not reported any.

In the current year, Spencer's company and Dillard's Inc. company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Spencer's company nor Dillard's Inc. company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Spencer's company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Dillard's Inc. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Spencer's company nor Dillard's Inc. company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Dillard's Inc. company nor Spencer's company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Dillard's Inc. nor Spencer's holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Spencer's company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Dillard's Inc. company.

Dillard's Inc. company employs more people globally than Spencer's company, reflecting its scale as a Retail.

Neither Dillard's Inc. nor Spencer's holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Dillard's Inc. nor Spencer's holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Dillard's Inc. nor Spencer's holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Dillard's Inc. nor Spencer's holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Dillard's Inc. nor Spencer's holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Dillard's Inc. nor Spencer's 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