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

Comparison Overview

TOM FORD FASHIONTOM FORD FASHION
VS
Under ArmourUnder Armour
TOM FORD FASHION

TOM FORD FASHION

672 Madison Ave, New York, 10022, US

Last Update: 10/03/2026

View Profile
772/1000Fair

TOM FORD IS A GLOBAL DESIGN HOUSE OFFERING EXCEPTIONAL LUXURY PRODUCTS ACROSS WOMEN’S AND MEN’S FASHION, ACCESSORIES, EYEWEAR AND BEAUTY. FOUNDED IN 2005 BY TOM FORD, TODAY THE BRAND HAS A PRESENCE IN MORE THAN 100 MARKETS GLOBALLY, AND IS WIDELY RECOGNIZED AS THE ARCHI...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:1,133
Subsidiaries:7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Under Armour

Under Armour

101 Performance Dr, Baltimore, Maryland, US, 21230

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
100/1000Critical

Under Armour is obsessed with being better, stronger, and more focused than anyone else out there. Our mission: to make athletes better. Our vision: to inspire you with performance solutions you never knew you needed and can’t imagine living without. Our values d...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:12,755
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
TOM FORD FASHION

TOM FORD FASHION

-
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
Under Armour

Under Armour

-
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 Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for TOM FORD FASHION in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Apparel and Fashion Industry Avg (This Year)

Under Armour has 5.66% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - TOM FORD FASHION (X = Date, Y = Severity)

TOM FORD FASHION cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Under Armour (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Under Armour 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...
TOM FORD FASHION

TOM FORD FASHION

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Under Armour

Under Armour

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
UND1769117511
🔒 Incident : Breach
UND1769174822
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
UND3492734111825

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2