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

Comparison Overview

EtosEtos
VS
Wakefern Food Corp.Wakefern Food Corp.
Etos

Etos

Provincialeweg 11, Zaandam, 1056 MA, NL

Last Update: 25/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.etos.nl
776/1000Fair

Etos is al meer dan 100 jaar dé drogist van Nederland en begrijpt de klant als geen ander, omdat we continu met haar meebewegen. Met zo’n 5.400 medewerkers, waarvan 2.400 gecertificeerde drogisten, werken we samen aan de missie om elke dag de klant te helpen zich goed t...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:2,016
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Wakefern Food Corp.

Wakefern Food Corp.

5000 Riverside Dr., Keasbey, NJ, US, 08832

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www2.wakefern.com
795/1000Fair

About Wakefern Food Corp. What began in 1946 as a small, local cooperative formed by eight visionary grocery store owners has grown into Wakefern Food Corp., the largest retailer-owned cooperative in the United States. Headquartered in New Jersey, Wakefern today is a v...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:27,858
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Etos

Etos

-
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
Wakefern Food Corp.

Wakefern Food Corp.

-
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 Etos in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Wakefern Food Corp. in 2026.

Incidents

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

Etos cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Wakefern Food Corp. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Wakefern Food Corp. 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...
Etos

Etos

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Wakefern Food Corp.

Wakefern Food Corp.

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-103761
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a memory exhaustion vulnerability in TransferMetadata::receivePeerNotify that allows unauthenticated attackers to grow process memory without limit. Attackers can repeatedly send notify frames up to 1 MB to the handshake RPC port, filling the uncapped notifys vector until the out-of-memory killer terminates the engine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-103760
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a denial of service vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to block the handshake daemon by never reading replies. Attackers can send a Metadata request to the handshake RPC port and stall SocketHandShakePlugin's single listener thread in writeFully(), breaking all subsequent handshakes, metadata fetches, notify and probe requests.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2025-71427
SUMMARY

Office-PowerPoint-MCP-Server through 2.0.7 contains a path traversal vulnerability that allows MCP callers to write and read files outside the working directory by supplying absolute paths or ../ sequences. Attackers can steer an AI agent via prompt injection to abuse save_presentation, open_presentation, or manage_image output_path to overwrite any server-writable file or load external files.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86344
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in 389-ds-base. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a complete LDAP operation followed by the first bytes of an incomplete LDAPMessage on the same connection, causing the server to hand that connection to a second worker thread before the first worker's result is flushed. The second worker blocks until nsslapd-ioblocktimeout while holding the connection mutex, preventing delivery of the completed operation's result. Repeating this across a small number of connections proportional to the configured worker-thread pool size exhausts the entire pool under default configuration, denying service to all clients (anonymous and authenticated, plaintext and TLS) for as long as the attacker maintains the connections.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-71454
SUMMARY

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') vulnerability in CWE-79 - Cross-site Scripting CAPEC-63 allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). This issue affects CAPEC-63: before 3.0b63.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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