Comparison Overview

Mohegan

VS

Coral

Mohegan

One Mohegan Sun Boulevard, Uncasville, Connecticut, 06382-1355, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Mohegan is the owner, developer and manager of premier entertainment resorts in the United States, Canada, and Northern Asia. Mohegan’s U.S. operations include resorts in Connecticut, Washington, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Nevada; Canadian operations are based in Niagara Falls; and Mohegan Inspire is located in Incheon, South Korea. The brand’s iGaming division, Mohegan Digital, provides cutting-edge online gaming solutions to Mohegan’s loyal fan base and meets the digital needs of customers on a global scale. Mohegan is owner and operator of Connecticut Sun, a professional basketball team in the WNBA. For more information on Mohegan and its properties, please visit www.mohegangaming.com.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 3,747
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Coral

Stratford Place Westfield Stratford City , London, Newham, E20 1EJ, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-26

Coral is a leading European betting and gaming company with strong market positions, high growth and well-established brands, both on the high street and online. We serve customers primarily in the UK and Italy; the two largest regulated gambling markets in Europe. The Group is proud to be the first gambling company to have received full GamCare accreditation across all its UK divisions. Online - The Group provides market-leading sports betting and gaming products for mobile, desktop and tablet devices through its brands: Coral.co.uk, Galabingo.com, Galacasino.com and Eurobet.it.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 2,282
Subsidiaries: 13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mohegangaming.jpeg
Mohegan
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/gala-coral-group.jpeg
Coral
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
Mohegan
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Coral
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 Mohegan in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Coral in 2025.

Incident History — Mohegan (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mohegan cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Coral (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Coral cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mohegangaming.jpeg
Mohegan
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gala-coral-group.jpeg
Coral
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2017
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Hacking
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Mohegan company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Coral company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Coral company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Mohegan company has not reported any.

In the current year, Coral company and Mohegan company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Coral company nor Mohegan company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Coral company nor Mohegan company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Coral company nor Mohegan company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Mohegan company nor Coral company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Mohegan nor Coral holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Coral company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Mohegan company.

Mohegan company employs more people globally than Coral company, reflecting its scale as a Gambling Facilities and Casinos.

Neither Mohegan nor Coral holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Mohegan nor Coral holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Mohegan nor Coral holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Mohegan nor Coral holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Mohegan nor Coral holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Mohegan nor Coral 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