Comparison Overview
Marks and Spencer

Marks and Spencer
Waterside House, London, W2 1NW, GB
Last Update: 16/07/2026
At M&S, we're dedicated to being the most trusted retailer, prioritising quality and delivering value. Every day, we bring the magic of M&S to our customers, whenever, wherever and however they want to shop with us. For over a century, we've set the standard, doing the ...

Harris Teeter
701 Crestdale Drive, Matthews, 28105, US
Last Update: 29/03/2026
Founded in 1960 in North Carolina, Harris Teeter has been enriching the lives of our customers and our communities for decades. Today, Harris Teeter employs 36,000 valued associates and operates more than 250 stores and 70 fuel centers in seven states and the District o...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Marks and Spencer







Harris Teeter






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)
Marks and Spencer has 222.58% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Harris Teeter in 2026.
Incident History - Marks and Spencer (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Marks and Spencer cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Harris Teeter (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Harris Teeter cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Marks and Spencer

Harris Teeter
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
An issue in the SBN UDP interface of NASA cFS v7.0.1 allows attackers to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via transmitting a crafted SBN frame.
A stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the cmd_edl function of OreSat Firmware v1.0. The vulnerability is triggered when processing the edl fw_flash command, where the <filename> argument is copied to a 64-byte stack buffer via memcpy without proper length validation. An attacker with physical access to the UART3 serial interface can exploit this vulnerability by sending a maliciously crafted command with an oversized filename parameter,
Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by a Violation of Secure Design Principles vulnerability that could result in a Security feature bypass. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to bypass security measures and gain unauthorized read access. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.
Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by an Incorrect Authorization vulnerability that could result in privilege escalation. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability to gain elevated privileges. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction.
Adobe Campaign Classic (ACC) is affected by a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could result in privilege escalation. Exploitation of this issue does not require user interaction. Scope is changed.