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

Comparison Overview

良品計画(MUJI)良品計画(MUJI)
VS
Majid Al FuttaimMajid Al Futtaim
良品計画(MUJI)

良品計画(MUJI)

2-5-1 Koraku,, Bunkyo-ku, 112-0004, JP

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile

1980年12月、西友ストアー(現:合同会社西友)のプライベートブランドとして40品目でデビューした「無印良品」は、現在では約7,500品目、店舗は日本を含む29の国・地域へと広がりました。 1989年に設立した良品計画は、「無印良品」の企画開発から、商品調達、流通・販売までを行う製造小売業です。他にも「Café&Meal MUJI」「IDÉE」の展開、キャンプ場の運営などを行っています。 「人と自然とモノの望ましい関係と心豊かな人間社会」を考えた商品、サービス、店舗、活動を通じて「感じ良い暮らしと社会」の実現に貢献することを企業理...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:539
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Majid Al Futtaim

Majid Al Futtaim

Majid Al Futtaim Tower 1, Dubai, AE

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
829/1000Good

Founded in 1992, Majid Al Futtaim is an Emirati-owned, diversified lifestyle conglomerate operating across the Middle East, Africa and Asia. The Group started from one man’s vision to transform the face of shopping, entertainment, and leisure to ‘Create Great Moments Fo...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:26,580
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
良品計画(MUJI)

良品計画(MUJI)

-
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
Majid Al Futtaim

Majid Al Futtaim

-
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 Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for 良品計画(MUJI) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Majid Al Futtaim in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - 良品計画(MUJI) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

良品計画(MUJI) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Majid Al Futtaim (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Majid Al Futtaim cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
良品計画(MUJI)

良品計画(MUJI)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
MUJ3592035102125
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
RYO0792107102025
Majid Al Futtaim

Majid Al Futtaim

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16197
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. The affected element is the function handleMessageReceive of the file pkg/channels/feishu/feishu_64.go of the component Group Message Handler. Such manipulation leads to missing authorization. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16196
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. Impacted is the function isPrivateOrRestrictedIP of the file pkg/tools/integration/web.go of the component web_fetch. This manipulation causes server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. Patch name: 2efbe5d560e7ed9bc5209c203dc4aa6ecdbc7405. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16195
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. This issue affects the function dispatchIncoming of the file pkg/channels/wecom/wecom.go of the component Group Message Handler. The manipulation results in incorrect authorization. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-10130
SUMMARY

QueryWeaver contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to obtain valid session tokens for existing accounts by submitting a signup request with a known victim email address. The signup route unconditionally creates and links a new token to the matching Identity via a Cypher MERGE operation before checking whether the email belongs to an existing account, causing the server to return a valid authenticated session token for the victim's identity without requiring any prior credentials or user interaction.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-16194
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in zhayujie CowAgent up to 2.1.1. This affects the function WebFetch.execute of the file agent/tools/web_fetch/web_fetch.py. Executing a manipulation of the argument url can lead to server-side request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. Upgrading to version 2.1.2 is able to mitigate this issue. This patch is called ea47f3097eed4f8295c4cb3d76ecb97e0f43d632. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component. The vendor was contacted early, responded in a very professional manner and quickly released a fixed version of the affected product.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8