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

Comparison Overview

Gruppo SanpellegrinoGruppo Sanpellegrino
VS
Frito-LayFrito-Lay
Gruppo Sanpellegrino

Gruppo Sanpellegrino

Via del Mulino, 6, Assago, 20090, IT

Last Update: 18/02/2026

View Profile
755/1000Fair

Il Gruppo Sanpellegrino è una delle più grandi e importanti realtà nel settore della produzione di bevande analcoliche in Italia. Dal 1889 porta prodotti di alta qualità alle persone e alcune delle eccellenze del nostro Paese in oltre 150 Nazioni del mondo attraverso i ...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:107
Subsidiaries:33
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Frito-Lay

Frito-Lay

7701 Legacy Dr, Plano, 75024, US

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.fritolay.com
785/1000Fair

We believe every consumer should have access to their favorite snack, everywhere. We own the manufacturing process from seed to shelf and actively invest in technology to automate key steps of the process. This helps us be more agile in what we need to make, who we need...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:16,136
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Gruppo Sanpellegrino

Gruppo Sanpellegrino

-
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
Frito-Lay

Frito-Lay

-
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 Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gruppo Sanpellegrino in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Frito-Lay in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Gruppo Sanpellegrino (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Gruppo Sanpellegrino cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Frito-Lay (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Frito-Lay cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Gruppo Sanpellegrino

Gruppo Sanpellegrino

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Frito-Lay

Frito-Lay

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2