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

Comparison Overview

YASYAS
VS
LC WaikikiLC Waikiki
YAS

YAS

Inge Lehmanns Gade 2, Århus, Midtjylland 8000, DK

Last Update: 21/05/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.y-a-s.com
769/1000Fair

YAS – your apparel & style – is a Danish fashion brand located in Aarhus, Denmark. It was established in 2013 as part of the BESTSELLER group. YAS is a destination for contemporary, sophisticated, and beautifully crafted designs with an immediate impact. We strike the ...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:0
Subsidiaries:13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
LC Waikiki

LC Waikiki

15 Temmuz Mahallesi Gülbahar Cad. No:41 Bağcılar, Istanbul, 34212, TR

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
816/1000Good

We have been continuing our journey that we started in France in 1988, as a Turkish brand since 1997 under the structure of “LC Waikiki Mağazacılık Hizmetleri Ticaret A.Ş.”. We act with the philosophy of “Everyone deserves to dress well” and we are working to be one of ...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:25,016
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
YAS

YAS

-
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
LC Waikiki

LC Waikiki

-
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 Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for YAS in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for LC Waikiki in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - YAS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

YAS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - LC Waikiki (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LC Waikiki cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
YAS

YAS

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
LC Waikiki

LC Waikiki

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-19756
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in Dromara lamp-cloud up to 5.10.0. This affects an unknown part of the file DefGenProjectController.java of the component Code Generator. Such manipulation of the argument outputDir/parent/projectPrefix leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-19753
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was detected in Model Context Protocol mcp-rdf-explorer 1.0.0. Affected is the function explore_url of the file src/mcp-rdf-explorer/server.py of the component MCP Server. Performing a manipulation of the argument url results in server-side request forgery. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-73843
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.2 and 1.1.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go served caller-facing management APIs on the externally reachable agent listener without authentication, allowing network-reachable attackers to invoke /api/proxy/ and /api/exec/ operations, proxy the data-plane Kubernetes API, and execute commands in workload pods in multi-cluster deployments. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.2 and 1.1.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-73842
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. Prior to 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2, internal/cluster-gateway/server.go exposed /api/proxy/, /api/exec/, and /api/wirelogs/ on an internal listener without requiring a client certificate or token, allowing any network-reachable caller to read tenant Kubernetes Secrets, mutate workloads, and execute commands across connected data planes. This issue is fixed in versions 1.0.3, 1.1.3, and 1.2.0-rc.2.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.3
CVE-2026-73841
SUMMARY

OpenChoreo is a complete, open-source developer platform for Kubernetes. From 1.2.0-rc.1 until 1.2.0, internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/exec.go and internal/openchoreo-api/api/handlers/wirelogs.go authorize component:exec and wirelogs:view using the caller-supplied project query parameter instead of comp.Spec.Owner.ProjectName, allowing a user with a project-scoped grant to execute commands in and read wirelogs from components owned by other projects in the same namespace. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.2.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-13
UPDATED
Date2026-08-13
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8