Comparison Overview

Grupo Salinas

VS

LPL Financial

Grupo Salinas

MX
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

Grupo Salinas es un conjunto de empresas dinámicas, que se caracterizan por la evolución constante y la innovación, enfocadas en la creación de valor económico, social y ambiental. Estamos en industrias diversas como comercio especializado, servicios financieros, telecomunicaciones y medios de comunicación, entre otros sectores. Nuestra Visión: Crear valor y prosperidad para millones de familias con base en una visión de negocios incluyente. Nuestra Misión: Ser el grupo empresarial mexicano más influyente con el mejor equipo de trabajo y con un modelo de gestión de alto desempeño; que permita la innovación permanente e impulsar la libertad, el estado de derecho y la igualdad de oportunidades. Sabemos que entender al cliente y ofrecerle todo lo que necesita para mejorar su calidad de vida es la vía para crear valor. Las acciones y estrategias del Grupo están alineadas a los más altos estándares internacionales en beneficio de la sociedad. Nuestro propósito es ofrecer excelentes productos y servicios que mejoren la calidad de vida de la población, sobre todo en los sectores menos favorecido. Grupo Salinas está integrada por: • Más de 100,000 colaboradores. • Banco Azteca, Tiendas Elektra, Italika, TV Azteca, Totalplay, Grupo Dragón, UPAX, Tiendas Neto, entre otras. • Estamos cerca de nuestros clientes en más de 6,000 puntos de contacto. • Presencia en 5 países: México, Estados Unidos, Guatemala, Honduras y Panamá.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 25,245
Subsidiaries: 17
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

LPL Financial

4707 Executive Drive, San Diego, CA, US, 92121-1968
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 750 and 799

LPL Financial Holdings Inc. (Nasdaq: LPLA) is among the fastest growing wealth management firms in the U.S. As a leader in the financial advisor-mediated marketplace, LPL supports over 29,000 financial advisors and the wealth management practices of approximately 1,100 financial institutions, servicing and custodying approximately $1.9 trillion in brokerage and advisory assets on behalf of approximately 7 million Americans. The firm provides a wide range of advisor affiliation models, investment solutions, fintech tools and practice management services, ensuring that advisors and institutions have the flexibility to choose the business model, services, and technology resources they need to run thriving businesses.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 14,111
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/grupo-salinas.jpeg
Grupo Salinas
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/lpl-financial.jpeg
LPL Financial
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
Grupo Salinas
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
LPL Financial
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Grupo Salinas in 2025.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LPL Financial in 2025.

Incident History — Grupo Salinas (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Grupo Salinas cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — LPL Financial (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LPL Financial cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/grupo-salinas.jpeg
Grupo Salinas
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lpl-financial.jpeg
LPL Financial
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Email Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2018
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 2/2012
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Theft of Employee's Desktop Computer
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Grupo Salinas company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to LPL Financial company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

LPL Financial company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Grupo Salinas company has not reported any.

In the current year, LPL Financial company and Grupo Salinas company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither LPL Financial company nor Grupo Salinas company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

LPL Financial company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Grupo Salinas company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither LPL Financial company nor Grupo Salinas company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Grupo Salinas company nor LPL Financial company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Grupo Salinas nor LPL Financial holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Grupo Salinas company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to LPL Financial company.

Grupo Salinas company employs more people globally than LPL Financial company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither Grupo Salinas nor LPL Financial holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Grupo Salinas nor LPL Financial holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Grupo Salinas nor LPL Financial holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Grupo Salinas nor LPL Financial holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Grupo Salinas nor LPL Financial holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Grupo Salinas nor LPL Financial 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