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

Comparison Overview

Rexel EuropeRexel Europe
VS
GraingerGrainger
Rexel Europe

Rexel Europe

Oxford House, Aylesbury, HP21 8, GB

Last Update: 07/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.rexeleurope.com
755/1000Fair

As part of the global ACCO Brands family, Rexel engineers inventive intelligently designed office products that make everyday tasks simpler, easier, and more efficient. With a proud British heritage, our brand is trusted by busy professionals to deliver flexible solutio...

NAICS:45321
NAICS Definition:Office Supplies and Stationery Stores
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:27
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Grainger

Grainger

100 Grainger Parkway, Lake Forest, 60045, US

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile

As a leading business-to-business organization, more than 4.5 million customers worldwide rely on Grainger for products in categories such as safety, material handling and metalworking, along with services like inventory management and technical support. For our Team ...

NAICS:45321
NAICS Definition:Office Supplies and Stationery Stores
Employees:21,351
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Rexel Europe

Rexel Europe

-
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
Grainger

Grainger

-
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 Retail Office Equipment Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Rexel Europe in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Office Equipment Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Grainger in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Rexel Europe (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rexel Europe cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Grainger (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Grainger 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...
Rexel Europe

Rexel Europe

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Grainger

Grainger

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
W.W1021090725
🔒 Incident : Breach
W.W552072825
🔒 Incident : Breach
W.W733072525

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-48777
SUMMARY

FileBrowser Quantum is a free, self-hosted, web-based file manager. Versions prior to 1.3.2-stable, 1.4.0-beta and 1.4.1-beta are vulnerable to Path Traversal through the publicPatchHandler in backend/http/public.go which joins user-controlled fromPath and toPath body fields with the trusted d.share.Path BEFORE the downstream sanitizer runs. Because filepath.Join collapses .. segments during the join, the sanitizer in resourcePatchHandler never sees the traversal and the move/copy/rename operates on a path outside the shared directory. The same root-cause pattern was patched for the bulk DELETE endpoint as CVE-2026-44542 (GHSA-fwj3-42wh-8673), but the PATCH handler with the identical pattern was not updated. A public share link with AllowModify=true is sufficient to exploit this. Anyone holding such a link can move, copy, or rename arbitrary files within the share owner's source root. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.3.3-stable and 1.4.2-beta.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47750
SUMMARY

stable-diffusion.cpp is a pure C/C++ library for running diffusion model (Stable Diffusion, Flux, Wan, Qwen Image, Z-Image, and more) inference. In versions prior to master-584-0a7ae07, the pickle .ckpt parser in src/model.cpp contained a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the GLOBAL opcode handler. The issue was caused by missing validation when searching for newline-delimited fields. A crafted .ckpt file without the expected newline could cause the parser to use -1 as a copy length, resulting in immediate heap corruption. The attack requires the victim or application to load a .ckpt file from an untrusted source, such as a downloaded model from a model sharing site. The issue has been resolved in version master-584-0a7ae07. If developers are unable to immediately update their applications they can work around this issue by following these instructions: do not load .ckpt checkpoint files from untrusted sources, and prefer trusted model sources and safer formats such as .safetensors where possible.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-47747
SUMMARY

stable-diffusion.cpp is a pure C/C++ library for running diffusion model (Stable Diffusion, Flux, Wan, Qwen Image, Z-Image, and more) inference. In versions prior to master-584-0a7ae07, the pickle .ckpt parser in src/model.cpp contained a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in the BINUNICODE opcode handler. The issue was caused by sign confusion on the opcode length field. A crafted .ckpt file could trigger memcpy with a very large length derived from a negative signed value, causing immediate heap corruption. The issue has been resolved in version master-584-0a7ae07. If developers are unable to immediately update their applications they can work around this issue by only loading .ckpt checkpoint files from trusted sources and preferring trusted model sources and safer formats such as .safetensors where possible.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-46448
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Nova before 33.0.2, the server create API does not strip certain hint data. The resulting instance has no Placement allocation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.4
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-22313
SUMMARY

The device has a webserver that exposes a REST API authenticated with a token on the management network. By exploiting an OS command injection vulnerability an authenticated attacker can send arbitrary commands to the device that are executed with administrative permissions by the underlying operating system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-16
UPDATED
Date2026-06-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3