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

Comparison Overview

Tesco BengaluruTesco Bengaluru
VS
AvoltaAvolta
Tesco Bengaluru

Tesco Bengaluru

81&82 EPIP Area,, Bengaluru, 560066, IN

Last Update: 25/12/2025

View Profile
794/1000Fair

Tesco in Bengaluru is a multi-disciplinary team serving our customers, communities and planet a little better every day across markets. Our goal is to create a sustainable competitive advantage for Tesco by standardizing processes, delivering cost savings, enabling agil...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:4,436
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Avolta

Avolta

N/A

Last Update: 02/04/2026

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

Avolta AG, (SIX: AVOL) is leading a travel experience revolution. The result of the Dufry-Autogrill business combination, Avolta puts the traveler at our strategic core as we maximize every moment of the journey through our unique combination of travel retail and trav...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:24,918
Subsidiaries:14
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Tesco Bengaluru

Tesco Bengaluru

-
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
Avolta

Avolta

-
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 Tesco Bengaluru in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Avolta in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Tesco Bengaluru (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tesco Bengaluru 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 - Avolta (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Avolta 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...
Tesco Bengaluru

Tesco Bengaluru

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Avolta

Avolta

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-19756
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in Dromara lamp-cloud up to 5.10.0. This affects an unknown part of the file DefGenProjectController.java of the component Code Generator. Such manipulation of the argument outputDir/parent/projectPrefix leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
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-2026-19753
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Model Context Protocol mcp-rdf-explorer 1.0.0. Affected is the function explore_url of the file src/mcp-rdf-explorer/server.py of the component MCP Server. Performing a manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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
3.9
CVE-2026-73843
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.2 and 1.1.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go served caller-facing management APIs on the externally reachable agent listener without authentication, allowing network-reachable attackers to invoke /api/proxy/ and /api/exec/ operations, proxy the data-plane Kubernetes API, and execute commands in workload pods in multi-cluster deployments. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.2 and 1.1.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-73842
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go exposed /api/proxy/, /api/exec/, and /api/wirelogs/ on an internal listener without requiring a client certificate or token, allowing any network-reachable caller to read tenant Kubernetes Secrets, mutate workloads, and execute commands across connected data planes. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-73841
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. From 1.2.0-rc.1 until 1.2.0, internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/exec.go and internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/wirelogs.go authorize component:exec and wirelogs:view using the caller-supplied project query parameter instead of comp.Spec.Owner.ProjectName, allowing a user with a project-scoped grant to execute commands in and read wirelogs from components owned by other projects in the same namespace. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8