Comparison Overview

Healthy Pet Co.

VS

Riding Warehouse

Healthy Pet Co.

Melbourne, AU
Last Update: 2025-12-25
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.healthypetco.com.au

Welcome to Healthy Pet Co., where your pet’s health and happiness are our top priorities. At Healthy Pet Co., we believe that pets deserve the very best. That’s why we’ve curated a selection of pet foods and treats that prioritise nutrition and quality, ensuring your furry family receive optimal care and nourishment. When you choose Healthy Pet Co., you’re not just making a purchase—you’re joining a community dedicated to the well-being of pets everywhere. Our mission goes beyond providing products; it’s about sharing knowledge and fostering a supportive environment for pet owners. Not only do we offer exceptional pet products, our website includes access to: - Our Vet and Nutritionist - Our Nutrition Guide, customised to your pets needs - Our rich library of information including training tips and health advice - Our Community Rewards Program, designed to give back to our loyal customers - Fast and reliable delivery - Support for local animal charities and more!

NAICS: 4541
NAICS Definition: Electronic Shopping and Mail-Order Houses
Employees: 4
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Riding Warehouse

181 Suburban Rd, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401, US
Last Update: 2025-12-26
Between 750 and 799
http://www.RidingWarehouse.com

Riding Warehouse strives to exceed all expectations for an online tack store, offering the best possible experience and products for you and your horse. Conveniently shop by discipline: English, Western or Endurance, where you'll discover tack, riding apparel and a full range of horse care supplies for the equine enthusiast. What sets us apart? Horse-savvy customer service, fast delivery to your door, and the best return policy in the industry.

NAICS: 454
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 17
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/healthy-pet-co.jpeg
Healthy Pet Co.
—
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/long-riders-gear.jpeg
Riding Warehouse
—
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
Healthy Pet Co.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Riding Warehouse
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Online and Mail Order Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Healthy Pet Co. in 2025.

Incidents vs Online and Mail Order Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Riding Warehouse in 2025.

Incident History — Healthy Pet Co. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Healthy Pet Co. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Riding Warehouse (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Riding Warehouse cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/healthy-pet-co.jpeg
Healthy Pet Co.
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/long-riders-gear.jpeg
Riding Warehouse
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Healthy Pet Co. company and Riding Warehouse company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Riding Warehouse company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Healthy Pet Co. company.

In the current year, Riding Warehouse company and Healthy Pet Co. company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Riding Warehouse company nor Healthy Pet Co. company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Riding Warehouse company nor Healthy Pet Co. company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Riding Warehouse company nor Healthy Pet Co. company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. company nor Riding Warehouse company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. nor Riding Warehouse holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. company nor Riding Warehouse company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Riding Warehouse company employs more people globally than Healthy Pet Co. company, reflecting its scale as a Online and Mail Order Retail.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. nor Riding Warehouse holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. nor Riding Warehouse holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. nor Riding Warehouse holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. nor Riding Warehouse holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. nor Riding Warehouse holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Healthy Pet Co. nor Riding Warehouse holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A vulnerability was found in Tenda WH450 1.0.0.18. Affected is an unknown function of the file /goform/PPTPUserSetting. Performing manipulation of the argument delno results in stack-based buffer overflow. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made public and could be used.

Published
Date
2025-12-28
Updated
Date
2025-12-28
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 8.3
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:C/I:C/A:C
cvss3
Base: 7.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
References
Description

A vulnerability has been found in Tenda WH450 1.0.0.18. This impacts an unknown function of the file /goform/PPTPServer. Such manipulation of the argument ip1 leads to stack-based buffer overflow. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

Published
Date
2025-12-28
Updated
Date
2025-12-28
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 8.3
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:C/I:C/A:C
cvss3
Base: 7.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
References
Description

A flaw has been found in omec-project UPF up to 2.1.3-dev. This affects the function handleSessionEstablishmentRequest of the file /pfcpiface/pfcpiface/messages_session.go of the component PFCP Session Establishment Request Handler. This manipulation causes null pointer dereference. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

Published
Date
2025-12-28
Updated
Date
2025-12-28
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 4.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:N/A:P
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in floooh sokol up to 16cbcc864012898793cd2bc57f802499a264ea40. The impacted element is the function _sg_pipeline_desc_defaults in the library sokol_gfx.h. The manipulation results in stack-based buffer overflow. The attack requires a local approach. The exploit is now public and may be used. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The patch is identified as 5d11344150973f15e16d3ec4ee7550a73fb995e0. It is advisable to implement a patch to correct this issue.

Published
Date
2025-12-28
Updated
Date
2025-12-28
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
AV:L/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 4.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
References
Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in PbootCMS up to 3.2.12. The affected element is the function get_user_ip of the file core/function/handle.php of the component Header Handler. The manipulation of the argument X-Forwarded-For leads to use of less trusted source. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used.

Published
Date
2025-12-28
Updated
Date
2025-12-28
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/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
References