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

Comparison Overview

H&M GroupH&M Group
VS
TargetTarget
H&M Group

H&M Group

Årstaängsvägen 13, Stockholm, Stockholm, SE, 117 75

Last Update: 13/09/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://hmgroup.com/
819/1000Good

Founded in 1947, H&M Group is a global design company with ~4,702 stores in 76 markets and 56 online markets. At H&M Group, we believe in making great design available to everyone. It’s essential in everything we do. Our family of brands and business ventures offer cust...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:99,888
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Target

Target

1000 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, 55403, US

Last Update: 12/09/2026

View Profile
653/1000Weak

Target is one of the world’s most recognized brands and one of America’s leading retailers. We make Target our guests’ preferred shopping destination by offering outstanding value, inspiration, innovation and an exceptional guest experience that no other retailer can de...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:184,387
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
6
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
H&M Group

H&M Group

-
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
Target

Target

-
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 Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for H&M Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

Target has 98.02% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - H&M Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

H&M Group 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 - Target (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Target 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...
H&M Group

H&M Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Target

Target

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
TAR1787336713
🔒 Incident : Breach
TAR1768244770
🔒 Incident : Breach
THEMOTIDSTARJAC1788457185

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-84411
SUMMARY

The web management service in affected RouterOS versions contains an integer underflow in its HTTP request body handling that is reachable before authentication. This can be leveraged by an unauthenticated network attacker to achieve arbitrary code execution as root, or to cause a denial of service, using a single crafted request.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/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
3.9
CVE-2026-105051
SUMMARY

Denuvo Anti-Tamper through 2026-03-04 allows bypass of a hypervisor presence check via CPUID interception (SimpleSvm.sys on AMD; hyperkd.sys and hyperhv.dll on Intel).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 1.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 1.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
0.5
CVE-2026-105050
SUMMARY

PeaZip before 11.3.0, in a non-default configuration, is vulnerable to OS command injection via a filename in an archive because "quotation character already used in the string" is mishandled.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:A/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-105049
SUMMARY

Zilliz Attu before 3.0.0 has a Playground feature that does not require authentication for proxying arbitrary HTTP and HTTPS requests to URLs on the public internet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105048
SUMMARY

The Playground feature of Zilliz Attu before 3.0.0 allows SSRF (proxying of requests to private IP addresses).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-02
UPDATED
Date2026-10-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2