Comparison Overview

Pandora

VS

Kering

Pandora

Havneholmen 17-19, None, Copenhagen, None, DK, 1561
Last Update: 2025-12-09
View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.pandoragroup.com

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
View Profile

Kering

40, rue de Sèvres, None, PARIS, None, FR, 75007
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 700 and 749
https://www.kering.com/en

Kering is a global, family-led luxury group, home to people whose passion and expertise nurture creative Houses across ready-to-wear and couture, leather goods, jewelry, eyewear and beauty: Gucci, Saint Laurent, Bottega Veneta, Balenciaga, McQueen, Brioni, Boucheron, Pomellato, Dodo, Qeelin, Ginori 1735, as well as Kering Eyewear and Kering Beauté. Inspired by their creative heritage, Kering’s Houses design and craft exceptional products and experiences that reflect the Group’s commitment to excellence, sustainability and culture. This vision is expressed in our signature: Creativity is our Legacy.

NAICS: 4483
NAICS Definition: Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores
Employees: 37,699
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/kering.jpeg
Kering
—
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
Pandora
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Kering
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

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

Pandora has 25.0% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Kering has 25.0% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Pandora cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Kering cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pandora-a-s.jpeg
Pandora
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Supply Chain Attack
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/kering.jpeg
Kering
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Credential Theft (Salesforce Logins), Social Engineering
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Exfiltration for Secondary Exploitation
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Compromised Cloud Account (Salesforce), Credential Theft/Phishing (likely)
Motivation: Financial Gain (Ransom Demand), Data Theft for Resale
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Kering company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Pandora company.

In the current year, Kering and Pandora have reported a similar number of cyber incidents.

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

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

Kering company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Pandora company has not reported such incidents publicly.

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

Neither Pandora nor Kering holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

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

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

Neither Pandora nor Kering holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Pandora nor Kering holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Pandora nor Kering holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Pandora nor Kering holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Pandora nor Kering holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Pandora nor Kering holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
References
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References