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

Comparison Overview

Krack by HussmannKrack by Hussmann
VS
Groupement MousquetairesGroupement Mousquetaires
Krack by Hussmann

Krack by Hussmann

12999 St Charles Rock Rd, Bridgeton, 63044, US

Last Update: 29/11/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.krack.com
769/1000Fair

For more than 85 years, Krack has been committed to delivering products with design leadership and innovation that provide customer-focused solutions for all your commercial refrigeration needs. Krack By Hussmann is a world leader in the development, manufacture and sa...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Groupement Mousquetaires

Groupement Mousquetaires

1 allée des Mousquetaires, Bondoufle, 91078, FR

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
803/1000Good

Avec près de 4000 points de vente en Europe et un chiffre d'affaires de 53,39 milliards d'euros en 2022, Le Groupement Les Mousquetaires est un acteur majeur de la grande distribution. Créé en France en 1969, le Groupement, fondé sur l'initiative privée, rassemble auj...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:61,493
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Krack by Hussmann

Krack by Hussmann

-
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
Groupement Mousquetaires

Groupement Mousquetaires

-
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 Krack by Hussmann in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Groupement Mousquetaires in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Krack by Hussmann (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Krack by Hussmann 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 - Groupement Mousquetaires (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Groupement Mousquetaires 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...
Krack by Hussmann

Krack by Hussmann

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Groupement Mousquetaires

Groupement Mousquetaires

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16197
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. The affected element is the function handleMessageReceive of the file pkg/channels/feishu/feishu_64.go of the component Group Message Handler. Such manipulation leads to missing authorization. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16196
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. Impacted is the function isPrivateOrRestrictedIP of the file pkg/tools/integration/web.go of the component web_fetch. This manipulation causes server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. Patch name: 2efbe5d560e7ed9bc5209c203dc4aa6ecdbc7405. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16195
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. This issue affects the function dispatchIncoming of the file pkg/channels/wecom/wecom.go of the component Group Message Handler. The manipulation results in incorrect authorization. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-10130
SUMMARY

QueryWeaver contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to obtain valid session tokens for existing accounts by submitting a signup request with a known victim email address. The signup route unconditionally creates and links a new token to the matching Identity via a Cypher MERGE operation before checking whether the email belongs to an existing account, causing the server to return a valid authenticated session token for the victim's identity without requiring any prior credentials or user interaction.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/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
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-16194
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in zhayujie CowAgent up to 2.1.1. This affects the function WebFetch.execute of the file agent/tools/web_fetch/web_fetch.py. Executing a manipulation of the argument url can lead to server-side request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. Upgrading to version 2.1.2 is able to mitigate this issue. This patch is called ea47f3097eed4f8295c4cb3d76ecb97e0f43d632. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component. The vendor was contacted early, responded in a very professional manner and quickly released a fixed version of the affected product.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8