Comparison Overview

Whitbread

VS

Hilton Grand Vacations

Whitbread

Whitbread Court, Houghton Regis, Dunstable, LU5 5XE, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-01

Whitbread PLC is the owner of the UK’s favourite hotel chain, Premier Inn, as well as restaurant brands, Beefeater, Brewers Fayre, Table Table, Bar + Block and Cookhouse and Pub. Whitbread employs more than 35,000 people in more than 1,200 Premier Inn hotels and restaurants across the UK and Germany, serving over five million customers every month. At Whitbread we are committed to being a force for good in the communities in which we operate. Our Sustainability programme, ‘Force for Good’ is focused on enabling people to live and work well and is built around three pillars of Opportunity, Community and Responsibility. Whitbread PLC is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 100. It is also a member of the FTSE4Good Index.

NAICS: 7211
NAICS Definition: Traveler Accommodation
Employees: 13,547
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Hilton Grand Vacations

5323 Millenia Lakes Boulevard, Orlando, FL, 32839, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Hilton Grand Vacations is a global leader in vacation ownership, developing, marketing and operating a portfolio of high-quality, shared-ownership properties in highly desired vacation destinations. Our company also manages and operates innovative club membership programs providing exclusive exchange, leisure travel, and reservation services for our Members. At Hilton Grand Vacations, our culture of hospitality extends to our more than 10,000 Team Members who collectively play an important role in delivering exceptional service, quality accommodations, and memorable travel experiences. That’s why we’ve created a workplace that supports growth, opportunity, work-life balance, and respect throughout our Club affiliated properties, sales centers, and corporate offices around the globe.

NAICS: 7211
NAICS Definition: Traveler Accommodation
Employees: 13,594
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/whitbread.jpeg
Whitbread
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/hilton-grand-vacations.jpeg
Hilton Grand Vacations
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
Whitbread
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Hilton Grand Vacations
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Hospitality Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Whitbread in 2025.

Incidents vs Hospitality Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hilton Grand Vacations in 2025.

Incident History — Whitbread (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Whitbread cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Hilton Grand Vacations (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hilton Grand Vacations cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/whitbread.jpeg
Whitbread
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hilton-grand-vacations.jpeg
Hilton Grand Vacations
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Whitbread company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Hilton Grand Vacations company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Hilton Grand Vacations company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Whitbread company.

In the current year, Hilton Grand Vacations company and Whitbread company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Hilton Grand Vacations company nor Whitbread company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Hilton Grand Vacations company nor Whitbread company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Hilton Grand Vacations company nor Whitbread company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Whitbread company nor Hilton Grand Vacations company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Whitbread nor Hilton Grand Vacations holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Whitbread company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Hilton Grand Vacations company.

Hilton Grand Vacations company employs more people globally than Whitbread company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitality.

Neither Whitbread nor Hilton Grand Vacations holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Whitbread nor Hilton Grand Vacations holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Whitbread nor Hilton Grand Vacations holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Whitbread nor Hilton Grand Vacations holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Whitbread nor Hilton Grand Vacations holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Whitbread nor Hilton Grand Vacations holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to 7.1.2-9 and 6.9.13-34, there is a vulnerability in ImageMagick’s Magick++ layer that manifests when Options::fontFamily is invoked with an empty string. Clearing a font family calls RelinquishMagickMemory on _drawInfo->font, freeing the font string but leaving _drawInfo->font pointing to freed memory while _drawInfo->family is set to that (now-invalid) pointer. Any later cleanup or reuse of _drawInfo->font re-frees or dereferences dangling memory. DestroyDrawInfo and other setters (Options::font, Image::font) assume _drawInfo->font remains valid, so destruction or subsequent updates trigger crashes or heap corruption. This vulnerability is fixed in 7.1.2-9 and 6.9.13-34.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
Description

FeehiCMS version 2.1.1 has a Remote Code Execution via Unrestricted File Upload in Ad Management. FeehiCMS version 2.1.1 allows authenticated remote attackers to upload files that the server later executes (or stores in an executable location) without sufficient validation, sanitization, or execution restrictions. An authenticated remote attacker can upload a crafted PHP file and cause the application or web server to execute it, resulting in remote code execution (RCE).

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

PHPGurukul Billing System 1.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the admin/index.php endpoint. Specifically, the username parameter accepts unvalidated user input, which is then concatenated directly into a backend SQL query.

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

NMIS/BioDose software V22.02 and previous versions contain executable binaries with plain text hard-coded passwords. These hard-coded passwords could allow unauthorized access to both the application and database.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
cvss4
Base: 8.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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

NMIS/BioDose V22.02 and previous versions' installation directory paths by default have insecure file permissions, which in certain deployment scenarios can enable users on client workstations to modify the program executables and libraries.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/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