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

Comparison Overview

Starbucks AustraliaStarbucks Australia
VS
Frito-LayFrito-Lay
Starbucks Australia

Starbucks Australia

Collingwood, Melbourne, AU

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
763/1000Fair

With our partners, our coffee and our customers at our core, we live these values: Craft We deliver excellence with passion and creativity. Courage We do the right thing, even when it’s hard. Results We exceed expectations of the people we serve. Belonging We t...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:219
Subsidiaries:20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Frito-Lay

Frito-Lay

7701 Legacy Dr, Plano, 75024, US

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.fritolay.com
785/1000Fair

We believe every consumer should have access to their favorite snack, everywhere. We own the manufacturing process from seed to shelf and actively invest in technology to automate key steps of the process. This helps us be more agile in what we need to make, who we need...

NAICS:722
NAICS Definition:Food Services and Drinking Places
Employees:16,136
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Starbucks Australia

Starbucks Australia

-
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
Frito-Lay

Frito-Lay

-
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 Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Starbucks Australia in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Food and Beverage Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Frito-Lay in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Starbucks Australia (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Starbucks Australia cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Frito-Lay (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Frito-Lay 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...
Starbucks Australia

Starbucks Australia

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Frito-Lay

Frito-Lay

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-56078
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains a path traversal vulnerability in MultiAgentMonitor that fails to sanitize agent IDs when building file paths. Attackers can include traversal sequences like ../ in agent IDs to read, write, or overwrite arbitrary files, enabling sensitive disclosure, denial of service, or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/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
2.8
CVE-2026-56077
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.115 contains an information disclosure vulnerability in the MultiAgentLedger component that allows attackers to access sensitive data by registering agents with duplicate IDs. Attackers can exploit the lack of agent ID uniqueness enforcement to share ledger instances and expose system prompts and conversation history between agents.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56076
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.128 contains a cross-origin agent execution vulnerability in the AGUI endpoint that allows remote attackers to trigger arbitrary agent execution. The POST /agui endpoint lacks authentication and hardcodes Access-Control-Allow-Origin: * headers, combined with Starlette's Content-Type-agnostic JSON parsing, enabling attackers to bypass CORS preflight checks via simple requests and exfiltrate sensitive agent responses including tool execution results and environment data.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-56075
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 4.5.128 contains an arbitrary shell command execution vulnerability where the UI modules hardcode approval_mode to auto, overriding administrator configuration from PRAISON_APPROVAL_MODE environment variable. Authenticated attackers can instruct the LLM agent to execute arbitrary shell commands via subprocess.run with shell=True, bypassing the manual approval gate and insufficient command sanitization blocklists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/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
2.8
CVE-2026-56074
SUMMARY

PraisonAI before 1.5.128 caches tool approval decisions by tool name only, not by invocation arguments, allowing subsequent execute_command calls to bypass approval prompts. Attackers can exploit this by obtaining initial approval for a benign command, then silently exfiltrate API keys and credentials via subsequent shell commands without user consent.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-18
UPDATED
Date2026-06-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:N/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8