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

Comparison Overview

Starbucks ChinaStarbucks China
VS
Coles GroupColes Group
Starbucks China

Starbucks China

徐汇区桂箐路65号, 上海市, 上海市, CN, 200233

Last Update: 22/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.starbucks.com.cn
780/1000Fair

星巴克咖啡公司自1999年进入中国以来,秉承“激发并孕育人文精神——每人、每杯、每个社区”的公司使命,我们始终致力于在中国成为一家与众不同的公司:在传承经典咖啡文化的同时,关爱我们的伙伴,为顾客提供超越期望的星巴克体验,并为所在社区的繁荣做出自己的贡献。目前星巴克已经在中国大陆130多个城市开设了3,000多家门店,拥有40,000名身穿绿围裙的星巴克伙伴。 我们热爱我们的咖啡。星巴克始终致力于通过道德采购,烘焙并提供高品质的阿拉比卡咖啡豆。我们还在中国云南普洱建立了星巴克中国咖啡种植者支持中心,旨在整合...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:2,455
Subsidiaries:20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Coles Group

Coles Group

800-838 Toorak Rd, Melbourne, 3123, AU

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://colescareers.com.au/
796/1000Fair

Coles is one of Australia’s leading retailers, with an extensive footprint of over 1,800 retail outlets nationally. We employ more than 115,000 team members, engage with more than 8,000 suppliers, and we welcome millions of customers through our store network and digita...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:12,143
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Starbucks China

Starbucks China

-
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
Coles Group

Coles Group

-
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 Starbucks China in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Coles Group in 2026.

Incidents

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

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

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

Incident History - Coles Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Coles Group 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...
Starbucks China

Starbucks China

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Coles Group

Coles Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9