Comparison Overview

Mina Group: Restaurant RN74

VS

Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts

Mina Group: Restaurant RN74

None
Last Update: 2025-03-05 (UTC)
Between 900 and 1000

Excellent

None

NAICS: 721
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 25
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts

Lyoner Straโˆšรผe 25 Frankfurt am Main, Hessen 60528, DE
Last Update: 2025-03-15 (UTC)

Excellent

Between 900 and 1000

Pure luxury and hospitality at its best - thatโ€šร„รดs what our about 60 Steigenberger Hotels & Resorts stand for in their fascinating locations around the globe. Immerse yourself in an exclusive cosmos full of character, glamour, and elegance. From historic and traditional establishments to vibrant city hotels to wellness oases surrounded by nature - follow your dreams and experience the unmistakable Steigenberger charm. Steigenberger Hotels & Resorts are a top choice for business guests. Modern technology, optimally equipped conference rooms and generously equipped workstationsโ€šร„รฎstaying with us means the ideas of tomorrow can flow freely. Our event team organizes conferences and meetings of all kindsโ€šร„รฎputting your business success in the spotlight. Show more Show less

NAICS: 721
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 10,001+
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/defaultcompany.jpeg
Mina Group: Restaurant RN74
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/steigenberger.jpeg
Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
Mina Group: Restaurant RN74
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Hospitality Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 in 2025.

Incidents vs Hospitality Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts in 2025.

Incident History โ€” Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Mina Group: Restaurant RN74
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/steigenberger.jpeg
Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company and Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company.

In the current year, Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company and Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company nor Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company nor Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company nor Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company nor Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company nor Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Mina Group: Restaurant RN74 company employs more people globally than Steigenberger Hotels and Resorts company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitality.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

FreshRSS is a free, self-hostable RSS aggregator. Versions 1.26.3 and below do not sanitize certain event handler attributes in feed content, so by finding a page that renders feed entries without CSP, it is possible to execute an XSS payload. The Allow API access authentication setting needs to be enabled by the instance administrator beforehand for the attack to work as it relies on api/query.php. An account takeover is possible by sending a change password request via the XSS payload / setting UserJS for persistence / stealing the autofill password / displaying a phishing page with a spoofed URL using history.replaceState() If the victim is an administrator, the attacker can also perform administrative actions. This issue is fixed in version 1.27.0.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

go-f3 is a Golang implementation of Fast Finality for Filecoin (F3). In versions 0.8.6 and below, go-f3 panics when it validates a "poison" messages causing Filecoin nodes consuming F3 messages to become vulnerable. A "poison" message can can cause integer overflow in the signer index validation, which can cause the whole node to crash. These malicious messages aren't self-propagating since the bug is in the validator. An attacker needs to directly send the message to all targets. This issue is fixed in version 0.8.7.

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

go-f3 is a Golang implementation of Fast Finality for Filecoin (F3). In versions 0.8.8 and below, go-f3's justification verification caching mechanism has a vulnerability where verification results are cached without properly considering the context of the message. An attacker can bypass justification verification by submitting a valid message with a correct justification and then reusing the same cached justification in contexts where it would normally be invalid. This occurs because the cached verification does not properly validate the relationship between the justification and the specific message context it's being used with. This issue is fixed in version 0.8.9.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L
Description

mkdocs-include-markdown-plugin is an Mkdocs Markdown includer plugin. In versions 7.1.7 and below, there is a vulnerability where unvalidated input can collide with substitution placeholders. This issue is fixed in version 7.1.8.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
Description

go-mail is a comprehensive library for sending mails with Go. In versions 0.7.0 and below, due to incorrect handling of the mail.Address values when a sender- or recipient address is passed to the corresponding MAIL FROM or RCPT TO commands of the SMTP client, there is a possibility of wrong address routing or even ESMTP parameter smuggling. For successful exploitation, it is required that the user's code allows for arbitrary mail address input (i. e. through a web form or similar). If only static mail addresses are used (i. e. in a config file) and the mail addresses in use do not consist of quoted local parts, this should not affect users. This issue is fixed in version 0.7.1

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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