Comparison Overview
TGI Fridays

TGI Fridays
19111 North Dallas Parkway, Dallas, 75287, US
Last Update: 20/09/2026
In 1965, TGI Fridays opened its first location in New York City. Today, there are 380 plus restaurants in 30 plus countries offering high-quality, authentic American food and legendary drinks, bringing together all people from all places. The freeing and liberating spir...

Culver's Restaurants
1240 Water St., Prairie Du Sac, 53578, US
Last Update: 05/09/2026
With strong, Midwestern family values and genuine hometown hospitality, Culver’s® has proudly served its signature ButterBurgers® and Fresh Frozen Custard since we opened our first restaurant in 1984. There are now over 1,000 Culver’s restaurants in 26 states, with more...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

TGI Fridays







Culver's Restaurants






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for TGI Fridays in 2026.
Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Culver's Restaurants in 2026.
Incident History - TGI Fridays (X = Date, Y = Severity)
TGI Fridays cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Culver's Restaurants (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Culver's Restaurants cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

TGI Fridays

Culver's Restaurants
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.
The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.
The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.
With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.
The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.