Comparison Overview

Lars Larsen Group

VS

PING AN

Lars Larsen Group

Randersvej 2.c, 8600 Silkeborg, DK
Last Update: 2026-01-18

Lars Larsen Group is owned by the Brunsborg family, descendants of JYSK founder Lars Larsen. The Group owns companies within a number of business areas including furniture, interior design, restaurants and hotels, and is also an active investor in equities, funds, and real estate. The Group is to this day operated in accordance with the family’s fundamental values of tradesmanship, responsibility and growth.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 16,177
Subsidiaries: 12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

PING AN

No. 5033 Yitian Road, Futian District, Shenzhen, 518046, CN
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 800 and 849

This is the official Company Page of Ping An Insurance (Group) Company of China, Ltd. (HKEx: 2318; SSE: 601318; ADR: PNGAY). Ping An strives to become a world leading technology-powered financial services group. We believe the way people receive financial services and healthcare in the future will be through intelligent ecosystems enabled by technology. With over 220 million retail customers and nearly 611 million Internet users, Ping An is one of the largest financial services companies in the world. Technology has enabled us to bring changes to the landscape of retail finance and healthcare in China. Supported by the Group’s strong core financials, our continued investment in fintech and healthtech resulted in increasing revenue contributions from our tech units as well as several unicorns. Ping An ranked 6th in the Forbes Global 2000 list and 16th in the Fortune Global 500 list in 2021. Follow us for latest news, events and job opportunities.

NAICS: 52
NAICS Definition: Finance and Insurance
Employees: 51,286
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/larslarsengroup.jpeg
Lars Larsen Group
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/ping-an.jpeg
PING AN
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
Lars Larsen Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
PING AN
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lars Larsen Group in 2026.

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PING AN in 2026.

Incident History — Lars Larsen Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lars Larsen Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — PING AN (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PING AN cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/larslarsengroup.jpeg
Lars Larsen Group
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ping-an.jpeg
PING AN
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

PING AN company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Lars Larsen Group company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, PING AN company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Lars Larsen Group company.

In the current year, PING AN company and Lars Larsen Group company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither PING AN company nor Lars Larsen Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither PING AN company nor Lars Larsen Group company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither PING AN company nor Lars Larsen Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Lars Larsen Group company nor PING AN company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Lars Larsen Group nor PING AN holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Lars Larsen Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to PING AN company.

PING AN company employs more people globally than Lars Larsen Group company, reflecting its scale as a Financial Services.

Neither Lars Larsen Group nor PING AN holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Lars Larsen Group nor PING AN holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Lars Larsen Group nor PING AN holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Lars Larsen Group nor PING AN holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Lars Larsen Group nor PING AN holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Lars Larsen Group nor PING AN holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

SummaryA command injection vulnerability (CWE-78) has been found to exist in the `wrangler pages deploy` command. The issue occurs because the `--commit-hash` parameter is passed directly to a shell command without proper validation or sanitization, allowing an attacker with control of `--commit-hash` to execute arbitrary commands on the system running Wrangler. Root causeThe commitHash variable, derived from user input via the --commit-hash CLI argument, is interpolated directly into a shell command using template literals (e.g.,  execSync(`git show -s --format=%B ${commitHash}`)). Shell metacharacters are interpreted by the shell, enabling command execution. ImpactThis vulnerability is generally hard to exploit, as it requires --commit-hash to be attacker controlled. The vulnerability primarily affects CI/CD environments where `wrangler pages deploy` is used in automated pipelines and the --commit-hash parameter is populated from external, potentially untrusted sources. An attacker could exploit this to: * Run any shell command. * Exfiltrate environment variables. * Compromise the CI runner to install backdoors or modify build artifacts. Credits Disclosed responsibly by kny4hacker. Mitigation * Wrangler v4 users are requested to upgrade to Wrangler v4.59.1 or higher. * Wrangler v3 users are requested to upgrade to Wrangler v3.114.17 or higher. * Users on Wrangler v2 (EOL) should upgrade to a supported major version.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:L/SI:L/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
Description

Vulnerability in the Oracle VM VirtualBox product of Oracle Virtualization (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.14 and 7.2.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with logon to the infrastructure where Oracle VM VirtualBox executes to compromise Oracle VM VirtualBox. While the vulnerability is in Oracle VM VirtualBox, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle VM VirtualBox. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.2 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Vulnerability in the Oracle VM VirtualBox product of Oracle Virtualization (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.14 and 7.2.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with logon to the infrastructure where Oracle VM VirtualBox executes to compromise Oracle VM VirtualBox. While the vulnerability is in Oracle VM VirtualBox, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized creation, deletion or modification access to critical data or all Oracle VM VirtualBox accessible data as well as unauthorized access to critical data or complete access to all Oracle VM VirtualBox accessible data and unauthorized ability to cause a partial denial of service (partial DOS) of Oracle VM VirtualBox. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.1 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

Vulnerability in the Oracle VM VirtualBox product of Oracle Virtualization (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.14 and 7.2.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with logon to the infrastructure where Oracle VM VirtualBox executes to compromise Oracle VM VirtualBox. While the vulnerability is in Oracle VM VirtualBox, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle VM VirtualBox. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.2 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Vulnerability in the Oracle VM VirtualBox product of Oracle Virtualization (component: Core). Supported versions that are affected are 7.1.14 and 7.2.4. Easily exploitable vulnerability allows high privileged attacker with logon to the infrastructure where Oracle VM VirtualBox executes to compromise Oracle VM VirtualBox. While the vulnerability is in Oracle VM VirtualBox, attacks may significantly impact additional products (scope change). Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in takeover of Oracle VM VirtualBox. CVSS 3.1 Base Score 8.2 (Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H