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

Comparison Overview

Lyreco Finland OyLyreco Finland Oy
VS
StaplesStaples
Lyreco Finland Oy

Lyreco Finland Oy

Väinö Tannerin tie, Vantaa, 01510, FI

Last Update: 24/01/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.lyreco.fi
755/1000Fair

Lyreco Finland – Kumppanisi sujuvampaan työpäivään Lyreco Finland Oy on Suomen johtava työpaikkatarviketoimittaja, joka palvelee yrityksiä valtakunnallisesti. Vantaan pääkonttoristamme ja logistiikkakeskuksestamme käsin lähes 200 asiantuntijaamme takaavat sujuvan palve...

NAICS:45321
NAICS Definition:Office Supplies and Stationery Stores
Employees:143
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Staples

Staples

500 Staples Drive, Framingham, 01702, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.staples.com
691/1000Weak

For nearly 40 years, Staples has been a trusted leader in delivering end-to-end workplace solutions for consumers and businesses of all sizes across a broad range of industries. The company provides a comprehensive portfolio of products, strategic solutions, and service...

NAICS:45321
NAICS Definition:Office Supplies and Stationery Stores
Employees:32,486
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Lyreco Finland Oy

Lyreco Finland Oy

-
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
Staples

Staples

-
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 Office Equipment Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lyreco Finland Oy in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Office Equipment Industry Avg (This Year)

Staples has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Lyreco Finland Oy (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lyreco Finland Oy cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Staples (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Staples cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Lyreco Finland Oy

Lyreco Finland Oy

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Staples

Staples

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
STA1775075784
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
STA23584224
🔒 Incident : Breach
STA607072725

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-110873
SUMMARY

Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110872
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-110871
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110870
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
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:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-110869
SUMMARY

Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9