Comparison Overview
Forever 21

Forever 21
3880 Mission Road, Los Angeles, 90031, US
Last Update: 02/04/2026
Forever 21 continues to be a fashion industry leader with a mission to make the latest trends accessible to all. F21 persists on staying ahead of innovation and providing styles and fit that our customers love. While reinventing for now and beyond, we’re seeking passion...

Ralph Lauren
650 Madison Ave, New York, US
Last Update: 11/09/2026
Ralph Lauren Corporation (NYSE:RL) is a global leader in the design, marketing and distribution of luxury lifestyle products in five categories: apparel, footwear & accessories, home, fragrances and hospitality. For more than 50 years, Ralph Lauren has sought to inspire...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Forever 21







Ralph Lauren






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Retail Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Forever 21 in 2026.
Incidents vs Retail Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)
Ralph Lauren has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Forever 21 (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Forever 21 cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Ralph Lauren (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Ralph Lauren cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Forever 21

Ralph Lauren
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
ASE/Kalkitech ASE2000 V2 Communication Test Set 2.35 through 2.37 on Windows contains an improper certificate validation vulnerability in the IEC 60870-5-104 TLS client (Task Mode). This allows a network-positioned attacker to bypass certificate validation via a certificate with multiple simultaneous faults, enabling a Man-in-the-Middle attack on protected communications.
A vulnerability was found in Xuxueli xxl-job up to 3.4.2. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file xxl-job-admin/src/main/java/com/xxl/job/admin/business/controller/JobGroupController.java. The manipulation results in improper privilege management. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
A vulnerability has been found in openstatusHQ openstatus up to f04c827112f30a11d571ebdad3892826034d6265. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the file apps/status-page/src/lib/proxy/resolve-custom-domain-rewrite.ts. The manipulation leads to server-side request forgery. The attack may be initiated remotely. This product uses a rolling release model to deliver continuous updates. As a result, specific version information for affected or updated releases is not available. The identifier of the patch is 86f370c9c20074c3c3fdec53a359874b8e670fd4. It is suggested to install a patch to address this issue. This issue got fixed with a silent patch.
- https://github.com/openstatusHQ/openstatus/
- https://github.com/openstatusHQ/openstatus/commit/86f370c9c20074c3c3fdec53a359874b8e670fd4
- https://github.com/openstatusHQ/openstatus/pull/2551
- https://vuldb.com/cve/CVE-2026-90486
- https://vuldb.com/submit/888087
- https://vuldb.com/vuln/403074
- https://vuldb.com/vuln/403074/cti
SEP sesam before 5.2.0.24 mishandles User Authorization with MFA. If AD authentication is configured and MFA is enforced, an attacker can create a second OTP access capability. SEP sesam and Active Directory handle username capitalization differently, which may allow multiple SEP sesam user accounts to be created for the same Active Directory (AD) account. Active Directory treats usernames as case-insensitive, while SEP sesam distinguishes between different letter casing. As a result, the same AD user can be represented by multiple SEP sesam user accounts that differ only in username capitalization. When Active Directory authentication is configured and multi-factor authentication (MFA) is enforced, this behavior may allow an additional OTP Authenticator to be registered for the same AD account, reducing the effectiveness of MFA protection.
A flaw has been found in IOBit Uninstaller 15.5.0.11. Affected by this issue is the function sub_11838 of the file IURegistryFilter.sys of the component IOCTL Dispatch Handler. This manipulation causes null pointer dereference. The attack requires local access. The exploit has been published and may be used. Identical IURegistryFilter.sys ships across multiple IObit families. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.