Comparison Overview

Moncler

VS

Pandora

Moncler

Via Stendhal 47, Milan, undefined, 20144, IT
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 750 and 799

Moncler was founded in Grenoble, France, in 1952 and is currently headquartered in Milan, Italy. Over the years the brand has combined style with constant technological research assisted by experts in activities linked to the world of the mountain. This makes the Moncler collections the quintessence of outwear that marries the extreme demands of nature with those of city life. In 2003 Remo Ruffini took over the company, of which he is currently President and Creative Director. Moncler manufactures and directly distributes men's, women's and accessory collections through its boutiques and in exclusive international department stores and multi-brand outlets.

NAICS: 4483
NAICS Definition: Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores
Employees: 3,548
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Pandora

Havneholmen 17-19, None, Copenhagen, None, DK, 1561
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

Pandora is the world’s largest jewellery brand. The company designs, manufactures and markets hand-finished jewellery made from high-quality materials at affordable prices Pandora jewellery is sold in more than 100 countries through more than 6,500 points of sale, including more than 2,500 concept stores. Headquartered in Copenhagen, Denmark, Pandora employs 32,000 people worldwide and crafts its jewellery at two LEED-certified facilities in Thailand using mainly recycled silver and gold. Pandora is committed to leadership in sustainability and has set science-based targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% across its own operations and value chain by 2030. The company is listed on the Nasdaq Copenhagen stock exchange and generated revenue of DKK 26.5 billion (EUR 3.6 billion) in 2022. See all our products and collections on pandora.net Visit our guidelines for this channel, and what types of post we accept here: https://pandoragroup.com/media/Corporate-social-media-principles

NAICS: 4483
NAICS Definition: Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores
Employees: 19,614
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/moncler.jpeg
Moncler
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/pandora-a-s.jpeg
Pandora
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
Moncler
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Pandora
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Retail Luxury Goods and Jewelry Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Moncler in 2025.

Incidents vs Retail Luxury Goods and Jewelry Industry Average (This Year)

Pandora has 61.29% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Moncler cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Pandora cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/moncler.jpeg
Moncler
Incidents

Date Detected: 01/2022
Type:Breach
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pandora-a-s.jpeg
Pandora
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Supply Chain Attack
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Moncler and Pandora have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Pandora company has reported more cyber incidents than Moncler company.

Neither Pandora company nor Moncler company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Pandora company and Moncler company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither Pandora company nor Moncler company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Moncler company nor Pandora company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Moncler nor Pandora holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Moncler company nor Pandora company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Pandora company employs more people globally than Moncler company, reflecting its scale as a Retail Luxury Goods and Jewelry.

Neither Moncler nor Pandora holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Moncler nor Pandora holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Moncler nor Pandora holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Moncler nor Pandora holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Moncler nor Pandora holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Moncler nor Pandora 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