Comparison Overview

FootBalance

VS

ASICS Oceania

FootBalance

Tammiston kauppatie 7b, Vantaa, Southern Finland, 01510, FI
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

The Nordic foot health brand with a vision of a world standing on healthier feet. We offer a unique all-in-one health based fitting experience, featuring advanced 3D foot scanning technology, biomechanical foot analysis and custom product recommendations. We are present in more than 40 countries and across 1,500 distribution points, including some of the world’s best sporting goods and specialty retailers, having conducted 5 million foot analyses and sold over 4 million pairs of custom insoles worldwide.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 64
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

ASICS Oceania

6 Darling St, Marsden Park, New South Wales, 2765, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

ASICS is at the forefront of the world performance sports market as undisputedly the leading running shoe brand for enthusiasts and professional athletes alike. Whether at professional sporting events, the Olympics or an everyday run around a park, ASICS is the runner’s choice, providing comfort, support and a superior ride. Beyond the running arena, ASICS has made further strides in development. The revolutionary ASICS Rugby and Football range incorporates injury prevention technologies, a first in these sports. ASICS is unmatched for technical superiority and rigorous quality. These standards have put the company in good stead since 1949 and will remain hallmarks of the brand as it innovates and develops well into the 21st century.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 279
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/footbalance.jpeg
FootBalance
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/asics-oceania.jpeg
ASICS Oceania
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
FootBalance
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
ASICS Oceania
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Sporting Goods Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for FootBalance in 2025.

Incidents vs Sporting Goods Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ASICS Oceania in 2025.

Incident History — FootBalance (X = Date, Y = Severity)

FootBalance cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — ASICS Oceania (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ASICS Oceania cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/footbalance.jpeg
FootBalance
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/asics-oceania.jpeg
ASICS Oceania
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ASICS Oceania company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to FootBalance company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, ASICS Oceania company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to FootBalance company.

In the current year, ASICS Oceania company and FootBalance company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither ASICS Oceania company nor FootBalance company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither ASICS Oceania company nor FootBalance company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither ASICS Oceania company nor FootBalance company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither FootBalance company nor ASICS Oceania company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither FootBalance nor ASICS Oceania holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither FootBalance company nor ASICS Oceania company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

ASICS Oceania company employs more people globally than FootBalance company, reflecting its scale as a Sporting Goods.

Neither FootBalance nor ASICS Oceania holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither FootBalance nor ASICS Oceania holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither FootBalance nor ASICS Oceania holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither FootBalance nor ASICS Oceania holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither FootBalance nor ASICS Oceania holds HIPAA certification.

Neither FootBalance nor ASICS Oceania 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