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

Comparison Overview

Mandarin OrientalMandarin Oriental
VS
Shangri-La GroupShangri-La Group
Mandarin Oriental

Mandarin Oriental

18 Westlands Road, Quarry Bay, ., HK

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
788/1000Fair

Mandarin Oriental Hotel Group is the award-winning owner and operator of some of the world’s most luxurious hotels, resorts and residences. Having grown from its Asian roots into a global brand, the Group now operates 43 hotels, 12 residences and 23 exclusive homes in 2...

NAICS:7211
NAICS Definition:Traveler Accommodation
Employees:13,845
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Shangri-La Group

Shangri-La Group

Kerry Centre, 683 King's Road, Quarry Bay, Hong Kong, HK

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
726/1000Moderate

Headquartered in Hong Kong SAR, the Shangri-La Group has grown from a single hotel business to a diverse and integrated global portfolio comprising quality real estate and investment properties, wellness and lifestyle facilities. Today, the Group owns, operates and mana...

NAICS:7211
NAICS Definition:Traveler Accommodation
Employees:16,362
Subsidiaries:10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Mandarin Oriental

Mandarin Oriental

-
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
Shangri-La Group

Shangri-La Group

-
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 Hospitality Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Mandarin Oriental in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Hospitality Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Shangri-La Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Mandarin Oriental (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mandarin Oriental cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Shangri-La Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Shangri-La Group 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...
Mandarin Oriental

Mandarin Oriental

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MAN233072725
Shangri-La Group

Shangri-La Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
SHA2110161122

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-44654
SUMMARY

LibreChat is an enhanced ChatGPT clone that supports multiple AI providers. In versions up to and including 0.8.3, a shared-agent editor can delete file records through `DELETE /api/files` that the owner has reused across multiple agents. The deletion removes the file globally — not just from the shared agent — breaking the owner's other private agents that reference the same `file_id`. The private agent retains a stale `file_id` reference that no longer resolves. A shared-agent editor can destroy files that the owner uses across multiple agents. The owner's private agents — which the attacker has no access to — break silently with stale `file_id` references. This is a cross-agent integrity violation: editing access to one agent should not affect another. Version 0.8.4 contains a patch.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-44653
SUMMARY

LibreChat is an enhanced ChatGPT clone that supports multiple AI providers. In versions up to and including 0.8.3, users with only `VIEW` access to an MCP server can retrieve the server's decrypted admin-managed secrets through `GET /api/mcp/servers` and `GET /api/mcp/servers/:serverName`. The returned config includes plaintext values for `apiKey.key` and `oauth.client_secret`. This allows viewers of a shared MCP server to exfiltrate the underlying provider credentials. Version 0.8..4 contains a patch. Other remediations include: never returning decrypted admin-managed secrets to non-owners; redacting apiKey.key and oauth.client_secret from all API responses consider returning only boolean presence indicators for secrets, similar to the auth-values route pattern; and, if owners need to edit configs without re-entering secrets, preserving secrets server-side and returning placeholders instead of plaintext.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
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:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-42507
SUMMARY

When returning errors, functions in the net/textproto package would include its input as part of the error. This might allow an attacker to inject misleading content to errors that are printed or logged.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-42504
SUMMARY

Decoding a maliciously-crafted MIME header containing many invalid encoded-words can consume excessive CPU.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-41412
SUMMARY

alf.io is an open source ticket reservation system for conferences, trade shows, workshops, and meetups. Prior to version 2.0-M5-2606, the alf.io extension sandbox injects a fully-functional HTTP client (`simpleHttpClient`) into every extension script's scope. The `postFileAndSaveResponse()` method accepts an arbitrary filesystem path as its `file` parameter and reads the file contents using `new FileInputStream(file)` with no path validation, directory restriction, or allowlist. A malicious extension script can read any file accessible to the JVM process user and exfiltrate it to an attacker-controlled server via HTTP POST. Version 2.0-M5-2606 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.2