Comparison Overview

Viva la Mama

VS

Riding Warehouse

Viva la Mama

Leipzig & Berlin, DE
Last Update: 2025-12-25
Between 750 and 799

Viva la Mama ist eine spezialisierte D2C-Brand für funktionale Bekleidung rund um Schwangerschaft und Babytragen. Wir entwickeln hochwertige, langlebige Jacken und Westen, die Eltern von der Schwangerschaft über die Tragezeit bis weit darüber hinaus begleiten. Unsere Produkte verbinden durchdachtes Design mit Funktionalität und moderner Ästhetik. Jedes Modell ist so konzipiert, dass es sich flexibel an unterschiedliche Phasen des Familienlebens anpasst – sei es mit oder ohne Baby, in Bewegung oder im Alltag. Die Entwicklung erfolgt in Deutschland, die Produktion verantwortungsvoll in einer ausgewählten europäischen Manufaktur. So stellen wir Qualität, konsistente Verarbeitung und faire Bedingungen sicher. Als Vertical Brand vereinen wir Produktentwicklung, E-Commerce, Kundenservice und Logistik unter einem Dach. Dadurch schaffen wir ein konsistentes Markenerlebnis und können nachhaltig, transparent und kundennah arbeiten. Unser Anspruch: funktionale, vielseitige und nachhaltige Produkte, die echte Alltagssituationen lösen – statt kurzlebiger Fast-Fashion.

NAICS: 4541
NAICS Definition: Electronic Shopping and Mail-Order Houses
Employees: 2
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Riding Warehouse

181 Suburban Rd, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401, US
Last Update: 2025-12-26

Riding Warehouse strives to exceed all expectations for an online tack store, offering the best possible experience and products for you and your horse. Conveniently shop by discipline: English, Western or Endurance, where you'll discover tack, riding apparel and a full range of horse care supplies for the equine enthusiast. What sets us apart? Horse-savvy customer service, fast delivery to your door, and the best return policy in the industry.

NAICS: 454
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 17
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/viva-la-mama.jpeg
Viva la Mama
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/long-riders-gear.jpeg
Riding Warehouse
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Viva la Mama
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Riding Warehouse
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Online and Mail Order Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Viva la Mama in 2025.

Incidents vs Online and Mail Order Retail Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Riding Warehouse in 2025.

Incident History — Viva la Mama (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Viva la Mama cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Riding Warehouse (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Riding Warehouse cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/viva-la-mama.jpeg
Viva la Mama
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/long-riders-gear.jpeg
Riding Warehouse
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Viva la Mama company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Riding Warehouse company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Riding Warehouse company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Viva la Mama company.

In the current year, Riding Warehouse company and Viva la Mama company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Riding Warehouse company nor Viva la Mama company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Riding Warehouse company nor Viva la Mama company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Riding Warehouse company nor Viva la Mama company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Viva la Mama company nor Riding Warehouse company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Viva la Mama nor Riding Warehouse holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Viva la Mama company nor Riding Warehouse company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Riding Warehouse company employs more people globally than Viva la Mama company, reflecting its scale as a Online and Mail Order Retail.

Neither Viva la Mama nor Riding Warehouse holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Viva la Mama nor Riding Warehouse holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Viva la Mama nor Riding Warehouse holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Viva la Mama nor Riding Warehouse holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Viva la Mama nor Riding Warehouse holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Viva la Mama nor Riding Warehouse holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper Input Validation vulnerability in qs (parse modules) allows HTTP DoS.This issue affects qs: < 6.14.1. SummaryThe arrayLimit option in qs does not enforce limits for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2), allowing attackers to cause denial-of-service via memory exhaustion. Applications using arrayLimit for DoS protection are vulnerable. DetailsThe arrayLimit option only checks limits for indexed notation (a[0]=1&a[1]=2) but completely bypasses it for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2). Vulnerable code (lib/parse.js:159-162): if (root === '[]' && options.parseArrays) { obj = utils.combine([], leaf); // No arrayLimit check } Working code (lib/parse.js:175): else if (index <= options.arrayLimit) { // Limit checked here obj = []; obj[index] = leaf; } The bracket notation handler at line 159 uses utils.combine([], leaf) without validating against options.arrayLimit, while indexed notation at line 175 checks index <= options.arrayLimit before creating arrays. PoCTest 1 - Basic bypass: npm install qs const qs = require('qs'); const result = qs.parse('a[]=1&a[]=2&a[]=3&a[]=4&a[]=5&a[]=6', { arrayLimit: 5 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 6 (should be max 5) Test 2 - DoS demonstration: const qs = require('qs'); const attack = 'a[]=' + Array(10000).fill('x').join('&a[]='); const result = qs.parse(attack, { arrayLimit: 100 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 10000 (should be max 100) Configuration: * arrayLimit: 5 (test 1) or arrayLimit: 100 (test 2) * Use bracket notation: a[]=value (not indexed a[0]=value) ImpactDenial of Service via memory exhaustion. Affects applications using qs.parse() with user-controlled input and arrayLimit for protection. Attack scenario: * Attacker sends HTTP request: GET /api/search?filters[]=x&filters[]=x&...&filters[]=x (100,000+ times) * Application parses with qs.parse(query, { arrayLimit: 100 }) * qs ignores limit, parses all 100,000 elements into array * Server memory exhausted → application crashes or becomes unresponsive * Service unavailable for all users Real-world impact: * Single malicious request can crash server * No authentication required * Easy to automate and scale * Affects any endpoint parsing query strings with bracket notation

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Description

A weakness has been identified in code-projects Refugee Food Management System 1.0. This affects an unknown part of the file /home/editfood.php. This manipulation of the argument a/b/c/d causes sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: 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
Description

A security flaw has been discovered in code-projects Refugee Food Management System 1.0. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /home/editrefugee.php. The manipulation of the argument rfid results in sql injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: 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
Description

Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel vulnerability in Mobile Builder Mobile builder allows Authentication Abuse.This issue affects Mobile builder: from n/a through 1.4.2.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Hiroaki Miyashita Custom Field Template allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Custom Field Template: from n/a through 2.7.5.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L