Comparison Overview

RedMart

VS

Avnet

RedMart

8 Shenton Way, Singapore, 068811, SG
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

RedMart is the supermarket arm of Lazada Group in Singapore, offering an unparalleled selection of quality fresh food, household essentials and premium speciality products with the convenience of scheduled home delivery seven days a week, all year round. To find out more about career opportunities at RedMart, please visit the Lazada LinkedIn page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/lazada

NAICS: 513
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 529
Subsidiaries: 25
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Avnet

2211 South 47th Street, Phoenix, AZ, US, 85034
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

Avnet is a global electronic components distributor with extensive design, product, marketing and supply chain expertise for customers and suppliers at every stage of the product lifecycle. For the past 100 years, Avnet has helped its customers and suppliers around the world realize the transformative possibilities of technology. Our culture was founded on new ideas and emerging technology. Headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, Avnet is a leading global technology distributor and solutions provider at the center of the technology value chain. Founded in 1921, we work with suppliers in every major technology segment to serve customers worldwide across a broad range of markets. Whether working on large-scale production or early prototypes, we meet customer needs through individualized, end-to-end service to streamline solutions and improve efficiency for customers worldwide. Headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, we serve more than 1 million customers in more than 140 countries and partner with global suppliers from almost every technology segment. Learn more about Avnet at www.avnet.com.

NAICS: 513
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 11,239
Subsidiaries: 14
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/redmart.jpeg
RedMart
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/avnet.jpeg
Avnet
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
RedMart
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Avnet
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for RedMart in 2025.

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Avnet in 2025.

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

RedMart cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Avnet cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/redmart.jpeg
RedMart
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2023
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 09/2018
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Malware
Motivation: Theft of Customer Information
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/avnet.jpeg
Avnet
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

RedMart company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Avnet company has not reported any.

In the current year, Avnet company and RedMart company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Avnet company nor RedMart company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

RedMart company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Avnet company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Avnet company nor RedMart company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither RedMart company nor Avnet company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither RedMart nor Avnet holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

RedMart company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Avnet company.

Avnet company employs more people globally than RedMart company, reflecting its scale as a Technology, Information and Internet.

Neither RedMart nor Avnet holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither RedMart nor Avnet holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither RedMart nor Avnet holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither RedMart nor Avnet holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither RedMart nor Avnet holds HIPAA certification.

Neither RedMart nor Avnet 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