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

Comparison Overview

Fairmont PittsburghFairmont Pittsburgh
VS
Landry'sLandry's
Fairmont Pittsburgh

Fairmont Pittsburgh

510 Market Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15222, US

Last Update: 01/11/2025

View Profile
772/1000Fair

Located at the heart of Pittsburgh’s business, cultural and retail hub, the Fairmont Pittsburgh hotel offers superb and distinctive guest services and accommodations in a luxury setting. With breathtaking views of PNC Park, the restored downtown and the Pittsburgh city ...

NAICS:7211
NAICS Definition:Traveler Accommodation
Employees:53
Subsidiaries:115
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Landry's

Landry's

1510 West Loop South, Houston, 77027, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.landrysinc.com
791/1000Fair

Landry's is a multinational, diversified restaurant, hospitality, gaming, and entertainment leader based in Houston, Texas. The company operates more than 600 establishments around the world, including well-known concepts, such as Landry’s Seafood House, Bubba Gump S...

NAICS:7211
NAICS Definition:Traveler Accommodation
Employees:12,566
Subsidiaries:10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Fairmont Pittsburgh

Fairmont Pittsburgh

-
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
Landry's

Landry's

-
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 Hospitality Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Fairmont Pittsburgh in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Hospitality Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Landry's in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Fairmont Pittsburgh (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fairmont Pittsburgh cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Landry's (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Landry's 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...
Fairmont Pittsburgh

Fairmont Pittsburgh

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Landry's

Landry's

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-81203
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Simple Online Food Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=login2. The manipulation of the argument email leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-80158
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in the ipa_getkeytab module of the community.general Ansible collection. The module's bind_pw parameter, used to supply the LDAP simple-bind password when retrieving a Kerberos keytab, is not declared with no_log, unlike the sibling password parameter in the same module. As a consequence, the supplied IPA/LDAP bind password is recorded in cleartext in the managed host's system journal/syslog (the module's "Invoked with" record), is included in the module's return values and verbose (-v) output, and is displayed in Automation Controller / AWX job output. The password is additionally passed on the command line to the ipa-getkeytab helper (as --bindpw <value>), exposing it in the process list to local users while the command runs. An attacker able to read these logs, job output, or the process table can obtain the directory bind credential, potentially compromising the accounts and objects that credential can access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-75340
SUMMARY

The device metadata import interface /device/instance/{productId}/property-metadata/import of jetlinks community 2.11 is vulnerable to Server-side request forgery (SSRF).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75338
SUMMARY

disconf (Distributed Configuration Management Platform) 2.6.36 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control. The config-fetching APIs /api/config/item, /api/config/file, /api/config/list and /api/config/simple/list are exposed without authentication. The LoginInterceptor explicitly whitelists these four paths, so any anonymous attacker can read every configuration item and configuration file managed by the config center.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75336
SUMMARY

Funiture 1.0.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the backend tool interfaces /sys/tool/select.json and /sys/tool/update.json.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA