Comparison Overview

Riverside Casino & Golf Resort®

VS

Sinai Grand Casino

Riverside Casino & Golf Resort®

3184 Highway 22, None, Riverside, IA, US, 52327
Last Update: 2025-11-28

What does it mean to “Live it up?” You’ll find out the moment you enter Riverside Casino & Golf Resort. From the magnificent fountains that greet you as you drive up to the luxurious surroundings of our hotel and casino, every aspect is designed for one very special purpose — your total enjoyment.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 404
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Sinai Grand Casino

GETEG - Sinai Grand Casino - Naama Bay, Sharm El Sheikh, 46619, EG
Last Update: 2025-11-27

The finest Casino in the Middle East, located in the always sunny seaside resort city of Sharm el Sheikh, in Egypt. We have the largest Texas Hold 'em poker room in the region as well as a myriad of the most popular games in any casino. Live dancing shows, special events, 3 large screens showing the best of todays sports, an Italian restaurant and a fully licensed bar for our guests pleasure.

NAICS: 7132
NAICS Definition: Gambling Industries
Employees: 33
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/riverside-casino-&-golf-resort.jpeg
Riverside Casino & Golf Resort®
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/sinai-grand-casino.jpeg
Sinai Grand Casino
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
Riverside Casino & Golf Resort®
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Sinai Grand Casino
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® in 2025.

Incidents vs Gambling Facilities and Casinos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Sinai Grand Casino in 2025.

Incident History — Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Sinai Grand Casino (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Sinai Grand Casino cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/riverside-casino-&-golf-resort.jpeg
Riverside Casino & Golf Resort®
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2024
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/sinai-grand-casino.jpeg
Sinai Grand Casino
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Sinai Grand Casino company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Sinai Grand Casino company has not reported any.

In the current year, Sinai Grand Casino company and Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Sinai Grand Casino company nor Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Sinai Grand Casino company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Sinai Grand Casino company nor Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company nor Sinai Grand Casino company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® nor Sinai Grand Casino holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company nor Sinai Grand Casino company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® company employs more people globally than Sinai Grand Casino company, reflecting its scale as a Gambling Facilities and Casinos.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® nor Sinai Grand Casino holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® nor Sinai Grand Casino holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® nor Sinai Grand Casino holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® nor Sinai Grand Casino holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® nor Sinai Grand Casino holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Riverside Casino & Golf Resort® nor Sinai Grand Casino 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