Comparison Overview

Prada Group

VS

Louis Vuitton

Prada Group

Via Antonio Fogazzaro, 28, None, Milan , Milan , IT, 20135
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 800 and 849

The Prada Group is a global leader in the luxury industry and a pioneer in its unconventional dialogue with contemporary society across diverse cultural spheres. Home to prestigious brands as Prada, Miu Miu, Church’s, Car Shoe, Marchesi 1824 and Luna Rossa, the Group remains committed to enhancing their value by increasing their visibility and desirability over time. Promoting creativity and sustainable growth, the Group offers its brands a shared vision that gives each of them the opportunity to stand out and express their essence. With 26 owned factories and over 14,800 employees, the Group designs and produces ready-to-wear, leather goods, footwear and jewellery collections, and distributes its products in more than 70 countries, through 606 Directly Operated Stores (DOS), e-commerce channels and selected e-tailers and department stores. Prada Group also operates in the eyewear and beauty sectors through licensing agreements with industry leaders. Prada S.p.A. is listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange as 1913.

NAICS: 4483
NAICS Definition: Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores
Employees: 11,309
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Louis Vuitton

2 Rue du Pont Neuf, None, Paris, None, FR, 75001
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 700 and 749

For more than 150 years, men and women at Louis Vuitton have shared the same spirit of excellence and passion, reaffirming their expertise every day, the world over. With us, every career is a journey, filled with excitement and challenge, desire and daring. There is no better way to reveal your potential. Explore, develop, innovate, create... Every journey is unique. Today, Louis Vuitton invites you to discover your own.

NAICS: 4483
NAICS Definition: Jewelry, Luggage, and Leather Goods Stores
Employees: 25,945
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pradagroup.jpeg
Prada Group
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/louis-vuitton.jpeg
Louis Vuitton
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
Prada Group
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Louis Vuitton
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 Prada Group in 2025.

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

Louis Vuitton has 383.87% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Prada Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Prada Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Louis Vuitton (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Louis Vuitton cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pradagroup.jpeg
Prada Group
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/louis-vuitton.jpeg
Louis Vuitton
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Motivation: Financial Gain, Fraud Enablement, Identity Theft, Data Monetization (Dark Web Sales)
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Prada Group company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Louis Vuitton company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Louis Vuitton company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Prada Group company has not reported any.

In the current year, Louis Vuitton company has reported more cyber incidents than Prada Group company.

Neither Louis Vuitton company nor Prada Group company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Louis Vuitton company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Prada Group company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Louis Vuitton company nor Prada Group company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Prada Group company nor Louis Vuitton company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Prada Group nor Louis Vuitton holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Prada Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Louis Vuitton company.

Louis Vuitton company employs more people globally than Prada Group company, reflecting its scale as a Retail Luxury Goods and Jewelry.

Neither Prada Group nor Louis Vuitton holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Prada Group nor Louis Vuitton holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Prada Group nor Louis Vuitton holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Prada Group nor Louis Vuitton holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Prada Group nor Louis Vuitton holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Prada Group nor Louis Vuitton 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