Comparison Overview

In-N-Out Burger

VS

Jack in the Box

In-N-Out Burger

4199 Campus Drive, Irvine, CA, 92612, US
Last Update: 2025-12-20
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.in-n-out.com

In-N-Out Burger was founded in 1948 by Harry and Esther Snyder in Baldwin Park, California, and remains privately owned and operated. Under the direction of the Snyder family, the company has opened restaurants throughout California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, Texas, Oregon, Colorado, and Idaho. In-N-Out Burger’s menu has remained the same since 1948, and we have maintained a simple philosophy – serve only the highest quality product, prepare it in a clean and sparkling environment, and serve it in a warm and friendly manner. We have built a reputation for fresh, made-to-order foods prepared and served by friendly, well trained Associates.

NAICS: 7225
NAICS Definition: Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees: 11,515
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Jack in the Box

9357 Spectrum Center Blvd, None, San Diego, California, US, 92123
Last Update: 2025-12-18
Between 750 and 799
http://www.jackinthebox.com

Jack in the Box has always been the place for those who live outside the box. Where you can try new things and order what you want when you want it. Now, let’s get to the facts! Did you know Jack in the Box was founded on February 21, 1951, by a businessman named Robert O. Peterson in San Diego, California? Yeah, you probably did. Did you know Jack in the Box pioneered a number of firsts in the quick-serve industry, including menu items that are now staples on most fast-food menu boards, like the breakfast sandwich and portable salads. Sure. Did you know Jack in the Box has over 2000 locations? Everyone knows that. Whatever the reason you came to Jack in the Box's LinkedIn page...welcome, we’re happy to have you here.

NAICS: 7225
NAICS Definition: Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees: 23,896
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/in-n-out-burger.jpeg
In-N-Out Burger
—
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/jack-in-the-box.jpeg
Jack in the Box
—
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
In-N-Out Burger
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Jack in the Box
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for In-N-Out Burger in 2025.

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Jack in the Box in 2025.

Incident History — In-N-Out Burger (X = Date, Y = Severity)

In-N-Out Burger cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Jack in the Box (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Jack in the Box cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/in-n-out-burger.jpeg
In-N-Out Burger
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jack-in-the-box.jpeg
Jack in the Box
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2019
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Phishing
Blog: Blog

FAQ

In-N-Out Burger company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Jack in the Box company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Jack in the Box company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas In-N-Out Burger company has not reported any.

In the current year, Jack in the Box company and In-N-Out Burger company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Jack in the Box company nor In-N-Out Burger company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Jack in the Box company has disclosed at least one data breach, while In-N-Out Burger company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Jack in the Box company nor In-N-Out Burger company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither In-N-Out Burger company nor Jack in the Box company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither In-N-Out Burger nor Jack in the Box holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Jack in the Box company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to In-N-Out Burger company.

Jack in the Box company employs more people globally than In-N-Out Burger company, reflecting its scale as a Restaurants.

Neither In-N-Out Burger nor Jack in the Box holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither In-N-Out Burger nor Jack in the Box holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither In-N-Out Burger nor Jack in the Box holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither In-N-Out Burger nor Jack in the Box holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither In-N-Out Burger nor Jack in the Box holds HIPAA certification.

Neither In-N-Out Burger nor Jack in the Box holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Marshmallow is a lightweight library for converting complex objects to and from simple Python datatypes. In versions from 3.0.0rc1 to before 3.26.2 and from 4.0.0 to before 4.1.2, Schema.load(data, many=True) is vulnerable to denial of service attacks. A moderately sized request can consume a disproportionate amount of CPU time. This issue has been patched in version 3.26.2 and 4.1.2.

Published
Date
2025-12-22
Updated
Date
2025-12-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

KEDA is a Kubernetes-based Event Driven Autoscaling component. Prior to versions 2.17.3 and 2.18.3, an Arbitrary File Read vulnerability has been identified in KEDA, potentially affecting any KEDA resource that uses TriggerAuthentication to configure HashiCorp Vault authentication. The vulnerability stems from an incorrect or insufficient path validation when loading the Service Account Token specified in spec.hashiCorpVault.credential.serviceAccount. An attacker with permissions to create or modify a TriggerAuthentication resource can exfiltrate the content of any file from the node's filesystem (where the KEDA pod resides) by directing the file's content to a server under their control, as part of the Vault authentication request. The potential impact includes the exfiltration of sensitive system information, such as secrets, keys, or the content of files like /etc/passwd. This issue has been patched in versions 2.17.3 and 2.18.3.

Published
Date
2025-12-22
Updated
Date
2025-12-22
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/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
References
Description

Fedify is a TypeScript library for building federated server apps powered by ActivityPub. Prior to versions 1.6.13, 1.7.14, 1.8.15, and 1.9.2, a Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) vulnerability exists in Fedify's document loader. The HTML parsing regex at packages/fedify/src/runtime/docloader.ts:259 contains nested quantifiers that cause catastrophic backtracking when processing maliciously crafted HTML responses. This issue has been patched in versions 1.6.13, 1.7.14, 1.8.15, and 1.9.2.

Published
Date
2025-12-22
Updated
Date
2025-12-22
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
References
Description

Authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE) in PluXml CMS 5.8.22 allows an attacker with administrator panel access to inject a malicious PHP webshell into a theme file (e.g., home.php).

Published
Date
2025-12-22
Updated
Date
2025-12-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

An issue was discovered in Xiongmai XM530 IP cameras on firmware V5.00.R02.000807D8.10010.346624.S.ONVIF 21.06. The GetStreamUri exposes RTSP URIs containing hardcoded credentials enabling direct unauthorized video stream access.

Published
Date
2025-12-22
Updated
Date
2025-12-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
References