Comparison Overview

Maverick Gaming

VS

Ocean Downs Casino

Maverick Gaming

undefined, Las Vegas, NV, 89117, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Maverick Gaming™ is majority owned and was founded in 2017 by gaming industry veterans Eric Persson, who previously served as Global Senior Vice President of Slots at Las Vegas Sands Corporation and Justin Beltram, former Vice President of Slots at Bellagio and Marina Bay Sands. Together they bring over 30 years of gaming experience spanning gaming markets around the world including the Las Vegas Strip (The Venetian Resort, The Palazzo at The Venetian Resort, and Bellagio), Macau (Sands China Limited), Singapore (Marina Bay Sands), and many regional markets in North America. Maverick Gaming™ currently owns and operates a portfolio of 27 properties across Nevada, Washington and Colorado with a total of 1800 slot machines, 350 table games, 1020 hotel rooms and 30 restaurants.

NAICS: 713
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 299
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Ocean Downs Casino

undefined, Berlin, undefined, undefined, US
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

Welcome to the Casino at Ocean Downs, where we are committed to offering our guests a fun and entertaining gaming experience. With over 34,000 square feet of gaming space, and 800 slot machines. Our entire team is extremely excited about the latest addition of slot machines and we are already planning for a variety of great promotions and events. We pride ourselves in providing each and every guest with a truly outstanding and memorable experience.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 55
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/maverick-gaming.jpeg
Maverick Gaming
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/casino-at-oceandowns.jpeg
Ocean Downs Casino
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
Maverick Gaming
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Ocean Downs Casino
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Maverick Gaming in 2025.

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ocean Downs Casino in 2025.

Incident History — Maverick Gaming (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Maverick Gaming cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Ocean Downs Casino (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ocean Downs Casino cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/maverick-gaming.jpeg
Maverick Gaming
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/casino-at-oceandowns.jpeg
Ocean Downs Casino
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Maverick Gaming company and Ocean Downs Casino company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Ocean Downs Casino company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Maverick Gaming company.

In the current year, Ocean Downs Casino company and Maverick Gaming company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Ocean Downs Casino company nor Maverick Gaming company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Ocean Downs Casino company nor Maverick Gaming company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Ocean Downs Casino company nor Maverick Gaming company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Maverick Gaming company nor Ocean Downs Casino company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Maverick Gaming nor Ocean Downs Casino holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Maverick Gaming company nor Ocean Downs Casino company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Maverick Gaming company employs more people globally than Ocean Downs Casino company, reflecting its scale as a Gambling Facilities and Casinos.

Neither Maverick Gaming nor Ocean Downs Casino holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Maverick Gaming nor Ocean Downs Casino holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Maverick Gaming nor Ocean Downs Casino holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Maverick Gaming nor Ocean Downs Casino holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Maverick Gaming nor Ocean Downs Casino holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Maverick Gaming nor Ocean Downs Casino 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