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

Comparison Overview

Lidl InternationalLidl International
VS
Shoppers StopShoppers Stop
Lidl International

Lidl International

Stiftsbergstraße 1, Neckarsulm, DE

Last Update: 13/07/2026

View Profile
Between 600 and 649
https://info.lidl/en
625/1000Poor

Welcome to Lidl International! 🌎 About 375,000 employees, over 31 countries worldwide, 1 global #teamlidl We have built up a community during more than 40 years of our Lidl journey. And #teamlidl with about 375,000 employees is growing every day. Worldwide. Get a ...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:3,795
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1
Shoppers Stop

Shoppers Stop

5th Floor, Umang Towers, Mindspace, Off Link Road, Malad West, Mumbai, Maharashtra, IN, 400064

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.shoppersstop.com
800/1000Good

Shoppers Stop is one of the pioneers of modern retailing in India. Launched in 1991, Shoppers Stop was the first department store in the country that revolutionized the way modern India shopped. Today, with 81 stores across 37 cities and a growing online presence at www...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:11,090
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Lidl International

Lidl International

-
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
Shoppers Stop

Shoppers Stop

-
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)

Lidl International has 7.53% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Shoppers Stop in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Lidl International (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lidl International cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Shoppers Stop (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Shoppers Stop 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...
Lidl International

Lidl International

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
LID1783967499
🔒 Incident : Breach
LID1783715540
🔒 Incident : Breach
THELIDMARHAR1783961535
Shoppers Stop

Shoppers Stop

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1