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

Comparison Overview

FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS)FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS)
VS
BESTSELLERBESTSELLER
FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS)

FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS)

655 W. 34th St, New York, 10001, US

Last Update: 03/02/2026

View Profile
756/1000Fair

FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS® events are becoming the most sourcing shows in the US dedicated to the rapidly growing performance fabric industry. The consistent message of sustainability and quality, partnered with our forward-thinking speakers and...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:91
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
BESTSELLER

BESTSELLER

Fredskovvej, Brande, undefined, DK-7330, DK

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://bestseller.com/
786/1000Fair

At BESTSELLER, we are more than 22,000 people in 38 different countries working for over 20 fashion brands such as ONLY, JACK & JONES, VERO MODA, NAME IT, SELECTED, VILA, PIECES, OBJECT, MAMALICIOUS, NOISY MAY and Y.A.S. We are a family-owned company with a strong found...

NAICS:N/A
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:14,881
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS)

FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS)

-
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
BESTSELLER

BESTSELLER

-
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 Apparel & Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Apparel & Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BESTSELLER in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

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

BESTSELLER 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...
FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS)

FUNCTIONAL FABRIC FAIR (powered by PERFORMANCE DAYS)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
BESTSELLER

BESTSELLER

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-94426
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in xuxueli xxl-job up to 3.5.0. The impacted element is an unknown function of the file /jobgroup/insert. This manipulation of the argument Name causes cross site scripting. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.5)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-94425
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Moore Threads MTT S80 Driver Package 340.150. The affected element is the function sub_140006F0C in the library mtdispkm64.sys of the component IOCTL Handler. The manipulation results in improper privilege management. Attacking locally is a requirement. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2
CVE-2026-94627
SUMMARY

vLLM Mooncake connector through 0.29.0 fails to properly manage GPU KV cache block ownership when concurrent child requests share a single transfer ID in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments. Attackers can trigger GPU memory exhaustion by submitting completion requests with multiple prompts, causing orphaned KV cache blocks to accumulate until process restart and eventually preventing legitimate requests from executing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
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-2026-94626
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 fails to validate the tp_size parameter in kv_transfer_params on OpenAI-compatible completion endpoints, allowing attackers to allocate unbounded memory. Attackers can supply arbitrary tp_size values in prefill/decode disaggregated deployments to exhaust memory and trigger kernel OOM-kill of the decode worker process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
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-2026-94625
SUMMARY

vLLM through 0.29.0 contains a resource exhaustion vulnerability in MooncakeConnector where rejected prefill requests create ownerless transfer placeholders that are never reclaimed. Attackers can send rejected requests to exhaust sender task pools, causing valid requests to be delayed by up to 480 seconds while health checks continue returning success.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-21
UPDATED
Date2026-09-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9