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

Comparison Overview

Worthen UPACO Footwear & ApparelWorthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel
VS
Tommy HilfigerTommy Hilfiger
Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel

Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel

34 Cellu Drive, Nashua, 03063, US

Last Update: 22/01/2026

View Profile

Worthen Extruded Films produces high-performance thermoplastic films for the apparel market. We have a dedicated Research & Development center and strong technical team that can custom-develop thermoplastic compounds and blends to suit most applications. Our in-house de...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Tommy Hilfiger

Tommy Hilfiger

Danzigerkade 165, Amsterdam, North Holland, NL, 1013

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.tommy.com
784/1000Fair

TOMMY HILFIGER is one of the world’s leading designer lifestyle brands creating a platform that inspires the modern American spirit, while committing to wasting nothing and welcoming all. Founded in 1985, Tommy Hilfiger delivers premium styling, quality and value to c...

NAICS:448
NAICS Definition:Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores
Employees:12,447
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel

Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel

-
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
Tommy Hilfiger

Tommy Hilfiger

-
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 Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Tommy Hilfiger in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Tommy Hilfiger (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tommy Hilfiger 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...
Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel

Worthen UPACO Footwear & Apparel

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Tommy Hilfiger

Tommy Hilfiger

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
TOM2720323

FAQ

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