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

Comparison Overview

株式会社リクリエ株式会社リクリエ
VS
Marriott HotelsMarriott Hotels
株式会社リクリエ

株式会社リクリエ

福岡市博多駅前4-3-22, 博多駅前4−3−22−8F, 812-0011, JP

Last Update: 17/05/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://reqrea.co.jp/
678/1000Weak

リクリエ自社ホテルブランド「グランドベース」を西日本エリアをメインに60施設展開しております。省人化ホテル運用事業とSaaS事業の2軸でホテルのアップデートを目指し、さらには運用だけでなく企画開発事業によって土地の利活用課題を解決することに挑戦しております。

NAICS:7211
NAICS Definition:Traveler Accommodation
Employees:8
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Marriott Hotels

Marriott Hotels

10400 Fernwood Rd, Bethesda, 20817, US

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
781/1000Fair

With over 500 properties worldwide, Marriott Hotels has reimagined hospitality to exceed the expectations of business, group, and leisure travelers. Marriott Hotels, Marriott’s flagship brand of quality-tier, full-service hotels and resorts, provides consistent, de...

NAICS:7211
NAICS Definition:Traveler Accommodation
Employees:42,337
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
株式会社リクリエ

株式会社リクリエ

-
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
Marriott Hotels

Marriott Hotels

-
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 Hospitality Industry Avg (This Year)

株式会社リクリエ has 37.5% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Hospitality Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Marriott Hotels in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - 株式会社リクリエ (X = Date, Y = Severity)

株式会社リクリエ cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Marriott Hotels (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Marriott Hotels 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...
株式会社リクリエ

株式会社リクリエ

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
REQ1778992020
Marriott Hotels

Marriott Hotels

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
MAR1318722

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-86098
SUMMARY

ntop nDPI versions before 6.0 contain a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the ndpi_json_string_escape function that writes beyond caller-supplied buffer boundaries. Attackers can trigger the overflow by supplying crafted network packet data including TLS SNI, HTTP headers, or DNS names that reach the vulnerable function, causing heap corruption.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-04
UPDATED
Date2026-09-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-86097
SUMMARY

PX4 Autopilot through 1.17.0 contains a null pointer dereference vulnerability in param_set_default_file() and param_set_backup_file() functions that allows attackers to crash the autopilot process. Attackers can invoke 'param select' or 'param select-backup' commands with no path argument from any PX4 shell to trigger the crash.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-04
UPDATED
Date2026-09-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86096
SUMMARY

PX4 Autopilot through 1.17.0 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in TemperatureCalibration::start() due to a race condition between task spawning and object deletion. Attackers can trigger the calibration process via shell commands to write to freed heap memory, corrupting unrelated objects or allocator metadata and destabilizing heap operations.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-04
UPDATED
Date2026-09-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86095
SUMMARY

Unidata netcdf-c through 4.10.1 contains an out-of-bounds write vulnerability in NC4_HDF5_inq_attname() that copies HDF5 attribute names into a fixed 256-byte buffer without length validation. Attackers can craft HDF5 files with oversized attribute names to overflow the destination buffer, causing memory corruption and crashes when applications enumerate attribute names.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-04
UPDATED
Date2026-09-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-48019
SUMMARY

Laravel is a web application framework. Prior to versions 12.60.0 and 13.10.0, a CRLF injection vulnerability in Laravel's email validation, in combination with how Symfony Mailer and Symfony Mime handle certain character sequences, may allow an unauthenticated attacker to interfere with outbound email processing in applications that send mail to user-supplied addresses. This issue has been patched in versions 12.60.0 and 13.10.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-04
UPDATED
Date2026-09-04
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2