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

Comparison Overview

PoshmarkPoshmark
VS
MANGOMANGO
Poshmark

Poshmark

203 Redwood Shores Pkwy, Redwood City, 94065, US

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.poshmark.com
764/1000Fair

Poshmark is a leading fashion resale marketplace powered by a vibrant, highly engaged community of buyers and sellers and real-time social experiences. Designed to make online selling fun, more social and easier than ever, Poshmark empowers its sellers to turn their clo...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:2,888
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
MANGO

MANGO

Mercaders 9-11, Palau Solità i Plegamans, 08184, ES

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://jobs.mango.com/
755/1000Fair

Mango, one of the leading international fashion groups, is a global company with design and creativity at the heart of its business model and a strategy based on constant innovation, the pursuit of sustainability and a complete ecosystem of channels and partners. With ...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:17,464
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Poshmark

Poshmark

-
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
MANGO

MANGO

-
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 Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Poshmark in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

MANGO has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Poshmark (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Poshmark cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - MANGO (X = Date, Y = Severity)

MANGO 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...
Poshmark

Poshmark

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
POS2527423
MANGO

MANGO

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ZAR1778228840
🔒 Incident : Breach
MAN2192421101625

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-83524
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in RedPort Optimizer wXa-203, Optimizer wXa-213 and Optimizer wXa-223 up to 20260704. This impacts the function exec of the file /xgatev1/system/datetime.php of the component System Clock. The manipulation leads to command injection. The attack may be initiated 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
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-82971
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in QVidium Opera11 3.3.2a26-Ax4x-opera11. This affects an unknown part of the file /cgi-bin/net_tr.cgi of the component CGI Script. This manipulation of the argument ipaddr causes command injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor explains: "QVidium has now closed its doors and no longer will be able to sell products or provide support." This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS2
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-82957
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in hyperledger-firefly firefly up to 1.4.0. The impacted element is the function ValidateOptions of the file internal/events/webhooks/webhooks.go of the component Webhook Subscription. Performing a manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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
3.9
CVE-2026-82954
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Dokploy up to 0.29.7. This issue affects the function writeTraefikConfigInPath of the file packages/server/src/utils/traefik/application.ts of the component Settings. The manipulation of the argument path results in path traversal. The attack can be launched 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
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.9)
CVSS2
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-82922
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in ShopEx ECShop up to 2.5.1. This vulnerability affects the function flow_update_cart of the file /flow.php?step=update_cart. The manipulation of the argument rec_id leads to sql injection. The attack can be initiated 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
Date2026-08-31
UPDATED
Date2026-08-31
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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
3.9