Comparison Overview
Rémy Cointreau

Rémy Cointreau
21, Rue Balzac, Paris, Île-de-France, 75008, FR
Last Update: 28/03/2026
The history of our family-owned Group, whose origins date back to 1724, is the result of the 1990 merger of holding companies owned by the Hériard Dubreuil and Cointreau families, who controlled E. Rémy Martin & Cie SA and Cointreau & Cie SA, respectively. Today, our 1,...

Pernod Ricard
5 cour Paul Ricard, Paris, 75008, FR
Last Update: 01/04/2026
Pernod Ricard is a convivial, responsible and successful global wine and spirits group and the #1 premium spirits organisation in the world. The Group represents 240 premium brands available in more than 160 countries. We are 18,500 exceptionally talented people worldwi...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Rémy Cointreau







Pernod Ricard






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Beverage Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Rémy Cointreau in 2026.
Incidents vs Beverage Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Pernod Ricard in 2026.
Incident History - Rémy Cointreau (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Rémy Cointreau cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Pernod Ricard (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Pernod Ricard cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Rémy Cointreau

Pernod Ricard
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
phpMyFAQ before 4.1.5 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability in GroupController::updatePermissions that allows GROUP_EDIT administrators to grant arbitrary rights to groups without verifying they hold those rights themselves. A delegated administrator can exploit this by assigning high-value permissions to a group they belong to, inheriting those rights and escalating privileges up to full administrative control.
n8n before 2.25.7 and 2.26.x before 2.26.2 contains an abstract syntax tree (AST) security validator bypass in the Python Code node. An authenticated user with permission to create or modify workflows containing a Python Code node can bypass the validator and access the task executor module namespace. The issue only affects self-hosted instances where the Python Task Runner is enabled; where N8N_BLOCK_RUNNER_ENV_ACCESS is configured to allow it, this can disclose environment variables accessible to the task runner process.
Grav CMS before 2.0.0-beta.2 contains multiple code-execution vulnerabilities. Three unsafe unserialize() calls - in Scheduler\JobQueue, Framework\Cache\Adapter\FileCache, and Session - deserialize untrusted data without restricting allowed classes, enabling PHP object injection and, via a gadget chain, arbitrary code execution where an attacker controls the serialized input. Additionally, InstallCommand's git clone operation passes the branch, url, and path parameters into a shell command without escaping, allowing OS command injection via plugin/theme installation (which requires admin access). A Twig security blocklist bypass (server-side template injection) is also present. The issues are fixed in 2.0.0-beta.2.
Storage Concentrator (SC & SCVM) contains a command injection vulnerability within the debug.pl script that is reachable without authentication. A remote attacker can submit a specially crafted HTTP request containing a malicious payload that is processed without adequate input sanitization, resulting in arbitrary command execution with root-level privileges on the underlying system.
Storage Concentrator (SC & SCVM) contains a command injection vulnerability in the ms_service.pl service, which listens on TCP port 9000 by default and accepts custom network packets to perform device actions. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a specially crafted packet containing a malicious payload that is processed without adequate sanitization, resulting in arbitrary command execution with root-level privileges.