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

Comparison Overview

Pierre et Vacances EuropePierre et Vacances Europe
VS
Mandarin OrientalMandarin Oriental
Pierre et Vacances Europe

Pierre et Vacances Europe

11 rue de Cambrai, Paris, 75019, FR

Last Update: 18/05/2026

View Profile
668/1000Weak

📢 If you’re following this page, it’s not just to see sunsets and snow-capped peaks in your LinkedIn feed. It’s to follow the transformation of a French brand that is reinventing local tourism on a European scale. With nearly 60 years of experience in the tourism land...

NAICS:7211
NAICS Definition:Traveler Accommodation
Employees:796
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Mandarin Oriental

Mandarin Oriental

18 Westlands Road, Quarry Bay, ., HK

Last Update: 05/09/2026

View Profile
788/1000Fair

Mandarin Oriental Hotel Group is the award-winning owner and operator of some of the world’s most luxurious hotels, resorts and residences. Having grown from its Asian roots into a global brand, the Group now operates 43 hotels, 12 residences and 23 exclusive homes in 2...

NAICS:7211
NAICS Definition:Traveler Accommodation
Employees:13,845
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Pierre et Vacances Europe

Pierre et Vacances Europe

-
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
Mandarin Oriental

Mandarin Oriental

-
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 Hospitality Industry Avg (This Year)

Pierre et Vacances Europe has 34.64% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Hospitality Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Mandarin Oriental in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Pierre et Vacances Europe (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Pierre et Vacances Europe cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Mandarin Oriental (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mandarin Oriental 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...
Pierre et Vacances Europe

Pierre et Vacances Europe

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
BELGÎTPIE1779092832
Mandarin Oriental

Mandarin Oriental

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MAN233072725

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-108773
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in erzhongxmu JEEWMS up to 2026.09.27-W39. Impacted is the function docheck of the file src/main/java/com/zzjee/wm/controller/WmOmNoticeHController.java. Performing a manipulation of the argument goodscode results in sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-108772
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in bleenco abstruse up to 2.1.0. This issue affects the function filepath.Join of the file server/api/worker/download_cache.go of the component Cache Endpoint. Such manipulation of the argument File leads to path traversal. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-108770
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Appwrite up to 2.3.0. This vulnerability affects the function PublicHostname of the file src/Appwrite/Platform/Modules/Avatars/Http/Screenshots/Get.php of the component Browser Screenshot Service. This manipulation of the argument url causes server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. Upgrading to version 2.4.0 is able to resolve this issue. Patch name: 393255e7302ae5503331d45802e2eee01c6a47fe. You should upgrade the affected component.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 5.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-108978
SUMMARY

Heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in Samsung Opensource rlottie allows Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables. This issue affects rlottie: e57b094f03c39a751a1fded6f7d6c13f1ed95ec9.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-108769
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in zhayujie CowAgent up to 2.2.0. This affects an unknown part of the file Markdown.tsx of the component Markdown Rendering. The manipulation results in denial of service. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-11
UPDATED
Date2026-10-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:N/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8