Comparison Overview

DIONS PIZZA

VS

Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center

DIONS PIZZA

2721 82Nd St, Lubbock, Texas 79423, US
Last Update: 2025-03-16 (UTC)
Between 900 and 1000

Excellent

None

NAICS: 722
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 25
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center

5200 Buffington Road, None, Atlanta, GA, US, 30349
Last Update: 2025-07-25 (UTC)

Excellent

At its Atlanta headquarters, known as the Corporate Support Center, Chick-fil-A, Inc. offers full-time careers in various fields such as Digital Transformation & Technology, Financial Services & Accounting, Enterprise Analytics, Restaurant Development, Early Talent Programs and more. Our team of more than 3,000 staff members tackles complex challenges every day โ€” from restaurant design to food innovation, to infusing personalized service into digital spaces โ€” all with the intent of supporting our owner-operators in delivering customer experiences defined by hospitality and care. Chick-fil-A, Inc. is the third largest quick-service restaurant company in the United States, known for its freshly-prepared food, signature hospitality and unique franchise model. More than 200,000 Team Members are employed by independent owner-operators in more than 3,000 restaurants across the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. In 2023, the company shared plans to expand by 2030 into Europe and Asia. Chick-fil-A owner-operators live and work in the communities their restaurants serve, each supporting local efforts to address hunger, education, and making a positive impact. The family-owned and privately held company was founded in 1967 by S. Truett Cathy.

NAICS: 7225
NAICS Definition: Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees: 79,628
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
DIONS PIZZA
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chick-fil-a-corporate.jpeg
Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
DIONS PIZZA
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for DIONS PIZZA in 2025.

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center in 2025.

Incident History โ€” DIONS PIZZA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DIONS PIZZA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
DIONS PIZZA
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chick-fil-a-corporate.jpeg
Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Both DIONS PIZZA company and Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas DIONS PIZZA company has not reported any.

In the current year, Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company and DIONS PIZZA company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company nor DIONS PIZZA company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company has disclosed at least one data breach, while DIONS PIZZA company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company nor DIONS PIZZA company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither DIONS PIZZA company nor Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither DIONS PIZZA company nor Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Chick-fil-A Corporate Support Center company employs more people globally than DIONS PIZZA company, reflecting its scale as a Restaurants.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Formbricks is an open source qualtrics alternative. Prior to version 4.0.1, Formbricks is missing JWT signature verification. This vulnerability stems from a token validation routine that only decodes JWTs (jwt.decode) without verifying their signatures. Both the email verification token login path and the password reset server action use the same validator, which does not check the tokenโ€™s signature, expiration, issuer, or audience. If an attacker learns the victimโ€™s actual user.id, they can craft an arbitrary JWT with an alg: "none" header and use it to authenticate and reset the victimโ€™s password. This issue has been patched in version 4.0.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

Apollo Studio Embeddable Explorer & Embeddable Sandbox are website embeddable software solutions from Apollo GraphQL. Prior to Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3, a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability was identified. The vulnerability arises from missing origin validation in the client-side code that handles window.postMessage events. A malicious website can send forged messages to the embedding page, causing the victimโ€™s browser to execute arbitrary GraphQL queries or mutations against their GraphQL server while authenticated with the victimโ€™s cookies. This issue has been patched in Apollo Sandbox version 2.7.2 and Apollo Explorer version 3.7.3.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:H/A:N
Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file /consulta-dispensas. Such manipulation leads to improper authorization. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: 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
Description

A weakness has been identified in Portabilis i-Educar up to 2.10. Affected is an unknown function of the file /module/Api/aluno. This manipulation of the argument aluno_id causes improper authorization. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: 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
Description

A security flaw has been discovered in Tencent WeKnora 0.1.0. This impacts the function testEmbeddingModel of the file /api/v1/initialization/embedding/test. The manipulation of the argument baseUrl results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited. It is advisable to upgrade the affected component. The vendor responds: "We have confirmed that the issue mentioned in the report does not exist in the latest releases".

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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