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

Comparison Overview

Princess CruisesPrincess Cruises
VS
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.
Princess Cruises

Princess Cruises

1510 SE 17th St, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, US, 33316

Last Update: 27/05/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://spr.ly/lin
652/1000Weak

Princess is the world’s leading premium cruise line operating a fleet of modern ships visiting over 380 destinations around the globe on more than 160 itineraries. Each moment on Princess is one of wonderful discovery where guests can relax and explore. The choices are ...

NAICS:5615
NAICS Definition:Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services
Employees:15,418
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.

7665 Corporate Center Drive, Miami, 33126, US

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.nclhltd.com/
796/1000Fair

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. (NYSE: NCLH) is a leading global cruise company which operates Norwegian Cruise Line, Oceania Cruises and Regent Seven Seas Cruises. With a combined fleet of 32 ships and approximately 66,500 berths, NCLH offers itineraries to appro...

NAICS:5615
NAICS Definition:Travel Arrangement and Reservation Services
Employees:17,266
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Princess Cruises

Princess Cruises

-
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
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.

-
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 Travel Arrangements Industry Avg (This Year)

Princess Cruises has 12.28% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Travel Arrangements Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Princess Cruises (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Princess Cruises cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Princess Cruises

Princess Cruises

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
CARHOLPRI1776630318
🔒 Incident : Breach
CARPRI1779920714
🔒 Incident : Breach
PRI2320221222
Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1