Comparison Overview
Mark & Graham

Mark & Graham
151 Union Street, San Francisco, CA, 94111, US
Last Update: 02/12/2025
Mark and Graham began with a passion for gift-giving and personalization. With the intention of changing the way we think about personalization, and the support of Williams-Sonoma, Inc., Mark and Graham was launched in the fall of 2012. Incorporating great design, e...

Mr Price Group
65 NMR Avenue, Durban, KwaZulu Natal, ZA, 4001
Last Update: 08/09/2026
Mr Price Group Limited is an omni-channel, fashion value retailer. The Group retails apparel, homeware and sportswear and is one of the fastest growing retailers in South Africa. Our History: 1885 - The first John Orrs store opens 1934 - The first Hub store opens 1952 ...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Mark & Graham







Mr Price Group






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Mark & Graham in 2026.
Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Mr Price Group in 2026.
Incident History - Mark & Graham (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Mark & Graham cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Mr Price Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Mr Price Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Mark & Graham

Mr Price Group
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.