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

Comparison Overview

JourneysJourneys
VS
Colruyt GroupColruyt Group
Journeys

Journeys

535 Marriott Dr, Nashville, Tennessee, 37214, US

Last Update: 09/02/2026

View Profile
782/1000Fair

Journeys is a teen retail leader with an emphasis on footwear and unique specialty items including apparel, backpacks, hats and accessories. With more than 800 stores in all 50 US states, Puerto Rico and Canada, Journeys offers the most popular brands that cater to the ...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:7,538
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Colruyt Group

Colruyt Group

Edingensesteenweg 196, Halle, Flemish Region, BE, 1500

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.colruytgroup.com
786/1000Fair

Colruyt Group operates in the food and non-food distribution sector in Belgium, France and Luxembourg with more than 700 own stores and over 1.000 affiliated stores. In Belgium, this includes Colruyt Lowest Prices, Okay, Comarkt, Bio-Planet, Cru, Bike Republic, Zeb, Poi...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:11,367
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Journeys

Journeys

-
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
Colruyt Group

Colruyt 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

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Journeys in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Colruyt Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Journeys (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Journeys 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 - Colruyt Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Colruyt Group 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...
Journeys

Journeys

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Colruyt Group

Colruyt Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8