Comparison Overview

lululemon

VS

Tesco

lululemon

1818 Cornwall Avenue, Vancouver, BC, V6J1C7, CA
Last Update: 2025-11-26

If you are seeking a job opportunity with lululemon, please note that our recruiters will only contact candidates using an @lululemon.com email address. -- lululemon athletica inc. (NASDAQ:LULU) is a healthy lifestyle inspired athletic apparel company for yoga, running, training, and most other sweaty pursuits, creating transformational products and experiences which enable people to live a life they love. Setting the bar in technical fabrics and functional designs, lululemon works with yogis and athletes in local communities for continuous research and product feedback.

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 23,399
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Tesco

Shire Park, Kestrel Way, Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire, GB, AL7 1GA
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

One of the world’s largest retailers of consumer goods from food to fashion. Serving our customers, communities and planet a little better every day in our stores and online is at the heart of everything we do. Founded in 1919 by Jack Cohen using the £30 he received on leaving the Royal Flying Corp, we’ve come a long way from his small market stall in East London. Today over 400,000 colleagues work across our stores, office, distribution and customer engagement centres in the UK, Europe and Asia. Share our passion for the people, products and places that make us great, and we can offer the right support to develop your skills. If you’re looking for the perfect work-life balance, a collaborative culture and flexible ways of working, find your opportunity to get on at www.tesco-careers.com

NAICS: 43
NAICS Definition: Retail Trade
Employees: 78,016
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lululemon.jpeg
lululemon
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/-tesco.jpeg
Tesco
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
lululemon
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Tesco
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for lululemon in 2025.

Incidents vs Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tesco in 2025.

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

lululemon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Tesco cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lululemon.jpeg
lululemon
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/-tesco.jpeg
Tesco
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2021
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2021
Type:Breach
Motivation: Financial Gain (Broadcom's subscription model push), Contractual Enforcement (Tesco's lawsuit)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 03/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Stolen Credentials
Motivation: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Tesco company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas lululemon company has not reported any.

In the current year, Tesco company and lululemon company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Tesco company nor lululemon company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Tesco company has disclosed at least one data breach, while lululemon company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Tesco company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while lululemon company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither lululemon company nor Tesco company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither lululemon nor Tesco holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

lululemon company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Tesco company.

Tesco company employs more people globally than lululemon company, reflecting its scale as a Retail.

Neither lululemon nor Tesco holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither lululemon nor Tesco holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither lululemon nor Tesco holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither lululemon nor Tesco holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither lululemon nor Tesco holds HIPAA certification.

Neither lululemon nor Tesco 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