Comparison Overview

LuckyStreak

VS

Luckia

LuckyStreak

Elijas iela 17-8, Riga, Riga, LV-1050, LV
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

LuckyStreak has provided high quality live dealer and casino games to the iGaming industry since 2014. We produce and stream Blackjack, Baccarat and Roulette from our own purpose-built hi-tech studio in Riga 24/7 to operators across the world. LuckyConnect, our aggregation solution, offers a library of over 4000 world-class casino, slot and crash games from over 50 leading providers like Pragmatic Play, Yggdrasil, PG Soft, Aviatrix and Ruby Play. Sweepstakes and social casino content specialists. We reduce the barriers to entry and provide exceptional gaming experiences that boost casino revenues. Everything in a secure single API integration. Get in touch for a no-fuss, no-commitment chat.

NAICS: 713
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 69
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Luckia

Rúa Severo Ochoa, 3, Province of A Coruña, 15008, ES
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Luckia is LUCKIA GAMING GROUP’s commercial brand. It combines offline and online gaming, including traditional businesses such as the operation of gaming machines in bars and restaurants and gaming arcades as well as new online gaming activities and land-based sports betting. Luckia has advanced the current concept surrounding gaming and aims to provide an extensive entertainment experience through no matter what channel, focusing all actions on the end customer. In this manner, Luckia aims to democratise gaming, with a view to it being considered a social, accessible and trust inspiring activity. Another feature that sets Luckia apart from other operators is that it offers its associated network of catering establishments new revenue enhancement opportunities, that together with the performance of the slot machines installed on their premises will bring in additional revenue from interventions directed towards customer attraction for the online circuit. Luckia thereby manages to provide online gaming consumers the assurance provided by its land based locations, offering them safe and reliable access.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 907
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/luckystreak.jpeg
LuckyStreak
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/luckia.jpeg
Luckia
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
LuckyStreak
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Luckia
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LuckyStreak in 2025.

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Luckia in 2025.

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

LuckyStreak cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Luckia cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/luckystreak.jpeg
LuckyStreak
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/luckia.jpeg
Luckia
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, Luckia company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to LuckyStreak company.

In the current year, Luckia company and LuckyStreak company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Luckia company nor LuckyStreak company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Luckia company nor LuckyStreak company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Luckia company nor LuckyStreak company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither LuckyStreak company nor Luckia company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither LuckyStreak nor Luckia holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither LuckyStreak company nor Luckia company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Luckia company employs more people globally than LuckyStreak company, reflecting its scale as a Gambling Facilities and Casinos.

Neither LuckyStreak nor Luckia holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither LuckyStreak nor Luckia holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither LuckyStreak nor Luckia holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither LuckyStreak nor Luckia holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither LuckyStreak nor Luckia holds HIPAA certification.

Neither LuckyStreak nor Luckia holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H