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

Comparison Overview

Packaging Design for RetailersPackaging Design for Retailers
VS
Marks and SpencerMarks and Spencer
Packaging Design for Retailers

Packaging Design for Retailers

N/A

Last Update: 01/11/2025

View Profile
755/1000Fair

Equator Design is a leading global specialist in packaging design for the retail sector. Packaging Design for Retailers is a forum for sharing thought leadership in retail packaging solutions.

NAICS:452
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:0
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Marks and Spencer

Marks and Spencer

Waterside House, London, W2 1NW, GB

Last Update: 18/06/2026

View Profile
100/1000Critical

At M&S, we're dedicated to being the most trusted retailer, prioritising quality and delivering value. Every day, we bring the magic of M&S to our customers, whenever, wherever and however they want to shop with us. For over a century, we've set the standard, doing the ...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:40,198
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
5
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Packaging Design for Retailers

Packaging Design for Retailers

-
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
Marks and Spencer

Marks and Spencer

-
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 Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Packaging Design for Retailers in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

Marks and Spencer has 371.7% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Packaging Design for Retailers (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Packaging Design for Retailers cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Marks and Spencer (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Marks and Spencer 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...
Packaging Design for Retailers

Packaging Design for Retailers

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Marks and Spencer

Marks and Spencer

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
MARVEN1777695899
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MARBYBCRO1777746530
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MAR1777213657

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-49416
SUMMARY

The CONS_HISTORY ioctl handler did not adequately validate the requested history size. A large value caused an integer overflow in the buffer size calculation, resulting in a heap allocation smaller than expected. Subsequent initialization of the buffer wrote beyond the end of the allocation. An unprivileged local user with access to a vt(4) device can trigger an out-of-bounds write in the kernel, potentially escalating privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49414
SUMMARY

The ELF image activator cleared per-process ASLR preference flags for setuid binaries after the code that computes the PIE base address, rather than before. As a result, a user-requested ASLR disable was still in effect at the point where the base address was chosen. An unprivileged local user can disable ASLR for a setuid PIE binary by calling procctl(2) before execve(2). This makes exploitation of any separate memory corruption vulnerability in that binary significantly easier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49417
SUMMARY

Second, the audio buffer backing a mapping could be freed when the device was closed even though the mapping remained valid. The freed memory could then be reused elsewhere while still accessible through the stale mapping. The /dev/dsp device nodes are world-accessible by default. On a system with an audio device, either issue allows an unprivileged local user to read and write kernel memory, which can be used to escalate privileges, potentially gaining full control of the affected system. At a minimum, an attacker can crash the kernel, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49413
SUMMARY

The Linuxulator determined whether a binary was set-user-ID or set-group-ID by checking the P_SUGID process flag. During execve(2), this flag is not yet set at the point where the auxiliary vector is constructed, so AT_SECURE was incorrectly set to zero for set-user-ID and set-group-ID executables. An unprivileged local user can inject a shared library via LD_PRELOAD into a set-user-ID or set-group-ID Linux binary, gaining the privileges of that binary.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-49412
SUMMARY

The kernel handler for IPV6_MSFILTER dropped a serializing lock in order to copy the source-filter list from userspace, then reacquired the lock. During this window another thread could free the multicast filter structure, leaving the handler with a stale pointer to freed memory. An unprivileged local user can exploit this use-after-free to escalate privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-27
UPDATED
Date2026-06-27
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA