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

Comparison Overview

McMenamins Pubs & BreweriesMcMenamins Pubs & Breweries
VS
Grupo BimboGrupo Bimbo
McMenamins Pubs & Breweries

McMenamins Pubs & Breweries

430 N Killingsworth St., Portland, Oregon, US, 97217

Last Update: 23/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.mcmenamins.com/
710/1000Moderate

McMenamins has been a neighborhood gathering spot throughout Oregon and Washington since 1983. We handcraft our own beer, wine, spirits and coffee. We offer an eclectic mix of pubs, historic hotels, movie theaters, concert venues, spas, events and just pure fun—join in!

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:1,036
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Grupo Bimbo

Grupo Bimbo

MX

Last Update: 12/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://grupobimbo.com
797/1000Fair

Grupo Bimbo es la empresa líder en panificación y un jugador relevante en snacks. Hornea +9,000 productos, distribuyéndolos a través de +3.5 millones de puntos de venta con +54,000 rutas. Grupo Bimbo tiene +153,000 colaboradores, +1,500 centros de ventas estratégicame...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:49,573
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
McMenamins Pubs & Breweries

McMenamins Pubs & Breweries

-
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
Grupo Bimbo

Grupo Bimbo

-
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 Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for McMenamins Pubs & Breweries in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

Grupo Bimbo has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - McMenamins Pubs & Breweries (X = Date, Y = Severity)

McMenamins Pubs & Breweries cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Grupo Bimbo (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Grupo Bimbo 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...
McMenamins Pubs & Breweries

McMenamins Pubs & Breweries

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
MCM555080525
Grupo Bimbo

Grupo Bimbo

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
FLOREL1788971139

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-90461
SUMMARY

OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-90460
SUMMARY

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90457
SUMMARY

The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90456
SUMMARY

An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90455
SUMMARY

A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA