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

Comparison Overview

Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas BrandHavaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand
VS
Newell BrandsNewell Brands
Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand

Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand

513 Boccaccio Ave., Venice, 90291, US

Last Update: 29/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://us.havaianas.com
762/1000Fair

In this showcase, you will find everything that concerns Havaianas'​ operation in the United States of America.

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:251
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Newell Brands

Newell Brands

6655 Peachtree Dunwoody Rd, Atlanta, GA, US, 30328

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.newellbrands.com
765/1000Fair

Newell Brands (NASDAQ: NWL) is a leading global consumer goods company with a strong portfolio of well-known brands, including Rubbermaid, Sharpie, Graco, Coleman, Rubbermaid Commercial Products, Yankee Candle, Paper Mate, FoodSaver, Dymo, EXPO, Elmer’s, Oster, NUK, Spo...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:14,503
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand

Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand

-
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
Newell Brands

Newell Brands

-
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 Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Newell Brands in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand 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 - Newell Brands (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Newell Brands 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...
Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand

Havaianas NA&C - an Alpargatas Brand

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Newell Brands

Newell Brands

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67595
SUMMARY

VaahCMS versions 2.0.0 through 2.3.4 contain a malicious obfuscated JavaScript payload embedded in the Blade template responsible for rendering security OTP emails, allowing remote attackers to execute unauthorized code in any browser that renders the affected email template with JavaScript enabled. The payload establishes a WebSocket connection to a hardcoded command-and-control endpoint, installs a password-field keylogger using MutationObserver to capture dynamically added inputs, scrapes WhatsApp Web DOM content, and accepts remote commands to redirect or overwrite the rendered page.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-15157
SUMMARY

undici does not validate the type property of a duck-typed blob-like request body before using it as the Content-Type header on the HTTP/1.1 dispatcher. In undici before 6.28.0, from 7.0.0 up to before 7.29.0, and from 8.0.0 up to before 8.9.0, an application that passes a hand-rolled blob-like body (via request, stream, pipeline, or dispatch) whose type is derived from untrusted input allows an attacker to inject CRLF sequences and append arbitrary HTTP headers, potentially smuggling a second request past the upstream. Native Blob objects are safe because their constructor strips CRLF from the type, and fetch is unaffected because it validates headers, but ecosystem libraries that build duck-typed blob shapes from user input can reach the vulnerable path. This is the same defect class as CVE-2022-35948 and CVE-2026-1527, on a header sink that the earlier fixes did not cover. The issue is fixed in undici 6.28.0, 7.29.0, and 8.9.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-14643
SUMMARY

undici's cache interceptor mishandles optional whitespace placed around the equals sign of a qualified no-cache or private Cache-Control directive. In undici from 7.0.0 up to before 7.29.0 and from 8.0.0 up to before 8.9.0, the parser either drops the directive or stores a field name with literal quote characters, so the cache decision fails to recognize the qualification and the response is stored. In shared-cache mode, this lets a response containing one user's authenticated data be served from cache to a later caller, including an unauthenticated one, when both requests resolve to the same cache key. It affects applications that enable the cache interceptor in shared mode, forward Authorization headers upstream, and receive cacheable responses with qualified directives padded with whitespace around the equals sign. This is the whitespace-around-equals variant that the fix for CVE-2026-9678 did not normalize, and it is fixed in undici 7.29.0 and 8.9.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2025-69945
SUMMARY

kishan0725 Hospital Management System 4.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in /doctor/edit-patient.php?editid=1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA