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

Comparison Overview

Eat. Live. Do. WellEat. Live. Do. Well
VS
GreggsGreggs
Eat. Live. Do. Well

Eat. Live. Do. Well

Charlotte, US

Last Update: 03/12/2025

View Profile
762/1000Fair

Our purpose is to create meaningful food experiences that promote well-being for people and planet. Our Chefs, Registered Dietitians and Sustainability experts share information and resources that you can use anywhere. Eat.Live.Do.Well is an initiative of Compass Group

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:23
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Greggs

Greggs

GB

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.greggs.co.uk
772/1000Fair

Greggs is a leading food-on-the-go retailer with over 2,400 shops nationwide and serving over six million customers a week. We stand for great tasting, freshly prepared food that our customers can trust, at affordable prices and aim to become the customers’ favourite ...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:12,822
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Eat. Live. Do. Well

Eat. Live. Do. Well

-
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
Greggs

Greggs

-
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 Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Eat. Live. Do. Well in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Greggs in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Eat. Live. Do. Well (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Eat. Live. Do. Well cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Greggs (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Greggs cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Eat. Live. Do. Well

Eat. Live. Do. Well

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Greggs

Greggs

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-90461
SUMMARY

OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-90460
SUMMARY

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90457
SUMMARY

The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90456
SUMMARY

An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90455
SUMMARY

A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA