Lafam vs Lidl-gb - Cyber Risk Comparison & Security Rating

Comparison Overview

LAFAM

Lidl GB

LAFAM

CARRERA 19 # 164 - 64 BOGOTA, Bogot√°, D.C. 571, CO

Last Update: 25/04/2026

View Profile

Between 750 and 799

http://www.lafam.com.co

757/1000Fair

Lafam pertenece al Grupo Essilor Luxottica l√≠der en el cuidado visual en el mundo, ofrecemos un amplio portafolio de productos y servicios en optometr√≠a y oftalmolog√≠a. Nuestra experiencia por m√°s de 40 a√±os nos permite brindar un proceso de ventas simple, transpar...

NAICS:452

NAICS Definition:N/A

Employees:201-500

Subsidiaries:0

12-month incidents

Known data breaches

Attack type number

Lidl GB

14 Kingston Rd, Chessington, Surbiton KT5 9NU, London, KT5 9NU, GB

Last Update: 10/07/2026

View Profile

Between 750 and 799

http://lidlcareers.co.uk

798/1000Fair

At Lidl, we’re a pretty close bunch. Sure, we all bring something unique to the table — but when you scratch below the surface, we’ve also got a whole lot in common. We’re plate spinners and problem solvers, working hard to keep homes stocked up across the UK. Just lik...

NAICS:43

NAICS Definition:Retail Trade

Employees:14,675

Subsidiaries:1

12-month incidents

Known data breaches

Attack type number

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category

LAFAM

ISO 27001Not verified

SOC2 Type 1Not verified

SOC2 Type 2Not verified

GDPRNot verified

PCI DSSNot verified

HIPAANot verified

Lidl GB

ISO 27001Not verified

SOC2 Type 1Not verified

SOC2 Type 2Not verified

GDPRNot verified

PCI DSSNot verified

HIPAANot verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LAFAM in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lidl GB in 2026.

Incidents

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

LAFAM 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 - Lidl GB (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lidl GB 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...

LAFAM

Incidents

No explicit notable incidents reported.

Lidl GB

Incidents

No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?

Between LAFAM company and Lidl GB company, which one has the largest number of employees ?

Between LAFAM and Lidl GB, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?

Between LAFAM and Lidl GB, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?

Which company is ISO 27001 certified - LAFAM or Lidl GB ?

Which company is PCI DSS compliant - LAFAM or Lidl GB ?

Between LAFAM and Lidl GB, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?

Between LAFAM and Lidl GB, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-96451

SUMMARY

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability in Ultimate Member Ultimate Member ultimate-member allows Privilege Escalation.This issue affects Ultimate Member: from n/a through 2.13.1.

PUBLISHED

Date2026-10-03

UPDATED

Date2026-10-03

RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)

CVSS3

Base Score: 8.8

Complexity: LOW

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

IMPACT SCORE

5.9

EXPLOITABILITY

2.8

REFERENCES

https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/ultimate-member/vulnerability/wordpress-ultimate-member-plugin-2-13-1-privilege-escalation-vulnerability?_s_id=cve

CVE-2026-103342

SUMMARY

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Unlimited Elements Unlimited Elements For Elementor (Free Widgets, Addons, Templates) unlimited-elements-for-elementor allows Reflected XSS.This issue affects Unlimited Elements For Elementor (Free Widgets, Addons, Templates): from n/a through 2.0.20.

PUBLISHED

Date2026-10-03

UPDATED

Date2026-10-03

RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)

CVSS3

Base Score: 7.1

Complexity: LOW

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L

IMPACT SCORE

3.7

EXPLOITABILITY

2.8

REFERENCES

https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/unlimited-elements-for-elementor/vulnerability/wordpress-unlimited-elements-for-elementor-free-widgets-addons-templates-plugin-2-0-20-cross-site-scripting-xss-vulnerability?_s_id=cve

CVE-2026-103065

SUMMARY

Improper Validation of Specified Quantity in Input vulnerability in Themeum Kirki kirki allows Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs.This issue affects Kirki: from n/a through 6.3.1.

PUBLISHED

Date2026-10-03

UPDATED

Date2026-10-03

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

IMPACT SCORE

4.2

EXPLOITABILITY

3.9

REFERENCES

https://patchstack.com/database/wordpress/plugin/kirki/vulnerability/wordpress-kirki-plugin-6-3-1-arbitrary-code-execution-vulnerability?_s_id=cve

CVE-2026-105122

SUMMARY

OpenAM before 16.1.3 contains a server-side request forgery vulnerability that allows attackers able to register or modify OAuth 2.0 clients to make OpenAM fetch internal resources via an unvalidated jwks_uri. Attackers can trigger unauthenticated fetches through client-authentication and ID-token validation to probe internal hosts, metadata endpoints or local files, or exhaust request threads for denial of service.

PUBLISHED

Date2026-10-03

UPDATED

Date2026-10-03

RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)

CVSS3

Base Score: 5.4

Complexity: LOW

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L

CVSS4

Base Score: 5.3

Complexity: LOW

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/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

2.5

EXPLOITABILITY

2.8

REFERENCES

CVE-2026-105121

SUMMARY

OpenAM before 16.1.3 contains an improper authorization vulnerability that allows delegated administrators to destroy sessions outside their realms because realm checks use the requester's realm. Authenticated accounts holding the iplanet-am-session-destroy-sessions attribute can supply a target session identifier or handle to forcibly log out users in any realm.

PUBLISHED

Date2026-10-03

UPDATED

Date2026-10-03

RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.9)

CVSS3

Base Score: 4.9

Complexity: LOW

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

CVSS4

Base Score: 6.9

Complexity: LOW

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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

3.6

EXPLOITABILITY

1.2

REFERENCES