Comparison Overview

Louis Vuitton

VS

Pandora

Louis Vuitton

2 Rue du Pont Neuf, None, Paris, None, FR, 75001
Last Update: 2025-12-19
Between 750 and 799

For more than 150 years, men and women at Louis Vuitton have shared the same spirit of excellence and passion, reaffirming their expertise every day, the world over. With us, every career is a journey, filled with excitement and challenge, desire and daring. There is no better way to reveal your potential. Explore, develop, innovate, create... Every journey is unique. Today, Louis Vuitton invites you to discover your own.

NAICS: 4483
NAICS Definition: Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores
Employees: 25,945
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Pandora

Havneholmen 17-19, None, Copenhagen, None, DK, 1561
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 700 and 749

Pandora is the world’s largest jewellery brand. The company designs, manufactures and markets hand-finished jewellery made from high-quality materials at affordable prices Pandora jewellery is sold in more than 100 countries through more than 6,500 points of sale, including more than 2,500 concept stores. Headquartered in Copenhagen, Denmark, Pandora employs 32,000 people worldwide and crafts its jewellery at two LEED-certified facilities in Thailand using mainly recycled silver and gold. Pandora is committed to leadership in sustainability and has set science-based targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% across its own operations and value chain by 2030. The company is listed on the Nasdaq Copenhagen stock exchange and generated revenue of DKK 26.5 billion (EUR 3.6 billion) in 2022. See all our products and collections on pandora.net Visit our guidelines for this channel, and what types of post we accept here: https://pandoragroup.com/media/Corporate-social-media-principles

NAICS: 4483
NAICS Definition: Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores
Employees: 19,614
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/louis-vuitton.jpeg
Louis Vuitton
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/pandora-a-s.jpeg
Pandora
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
Louis Vuitton
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Pandora
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Luxury Goods and Jewelry Industry Average (This Year)

Louis Vuitton has 25.0% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Retail Luxury Goods and Jewelry Industry Average (This Year)

Pandora has 25.0% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Louis Vuitton (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Louis Vuitton cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Pandora (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pandora cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/louis-vuitton.jpeg
Louis Vuitton
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Motivation: Financial Gain, Fraud Enablement, Identity Theft, Data Monetization (Dark Web Sales)
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pandora-a-s.jpeg
Pandora
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Supply Chain Attack
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Louis Vuitton company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Pandora company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Louis Vuitton and Pandora have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Pandora and Louis Vuitton have reported a similar number of cyber incidents.

Neither Pandora company nor Louis Vuitton company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Pandora company and Louis Vuitton company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither Pandora company nor Louis Vuitton company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Louis Vuitton company nor Pandora company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Louis Vuitton nor Pandora holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Louis Vuitton company nor Pandora company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Louis Vuitton company employs more people globally than Pandora company, reflecting its scale as a Retail Luxury Goods and Jewelry.

Neither Louis Vuitton nor Pandora holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Louis Vuitton nor Pandora holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Louis Vuitton nor Pandora holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Louis Vuitton nor Pandora holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Louis Vuitton nor Pandora holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Louis Vuitton nor Pandora holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

httparty is an API tool. In versions 0.23.2 and prior, httparty is vulnerable to SSRF. This issue can pose a risk of leaking API keys, and it can also allow third parties to issue requests to internal servers. This issue has been patched via commit 0529bcd.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.8
Severity: 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: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
Description

5ire is a cross-platform desktop artificial intelligence assistant and model context protocol client. In versions 0.15.2 and prior, an RCE vulnerability exists in useMarkdown.ts, where the markdown-it-mermaid plugin is initialized with securityLevel: 'loose'. This configuration explicitly permits the rendering of HTML tags within Mermaid diagram nodes. This issue has not been patched at time of publication.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

continuwuity is a Matrix homeserver written in Rust. Prior to version 0.5.0, this vulnerability allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to force the target server to cryptographically sign arbitrary membership events. The flaw exists because the server fails to validate the origin of a signing request, provided the event's state_key is a valid user ID belonging to the target server. This issue has been patched in version 0.5.0. A workaround for this issue involves blocking access to the PUT /_matrix/federation/v2/invite/{roomId}/{eventId} endpoint using the reverse proxy.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:L/SA:L/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

LangChain is a framework for building LLM-powered applications. Prior to @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and prior to langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain JS's toJSON() method (and subsequently when string-ifying objects using JSON.stringify(). The method did not escape objects with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form data in kwargs. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

LangChain is a framework for building agents and LLM-powered applications. Prior to versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain's dumps() and dumpd() functions. The functions do not escape dictionaries with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form dictionaries. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N