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

Comparison Overview

Yıldız HoldingYıldız Holding
VS
the LEGO Groupthe LEGO Group
Yıldız Holding

Yıldız Holding

Kısıklı Mah. Ferah Cad. No:1, Istanbul, 34692, TR

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
796/1000Fair

Yıldız Holding’in 1944 yılında İstanbul’da bisküvi üretimiyle başlayan hikâyesi, bugün 300’den fazla markayla 5 kıtada 4 milyar insana ulaştırdığımız gıda-atıştırmalık ürünlerimizle ve Türkiye’nin her noktasındaki perakende şirketlerimizle devam ediyor. Kökleri Türkiy...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:19,803
Subsidiaries:15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
the LEGO Group

the LEGO Group

Aastvej 1, Billund, DK, 7190

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
813/1000Good

We are the LEGO Group, the company behind the world’s most loved LEGO® bricks. Our brand name derived from the two Danish words Leg Godt, which mean “Play Well”. We’ve been sparking imaginations and inspiring the builders of tomorrow since 1932. This is our mission an...

NAICS:30
NAICS Definition:Manufacturing
Employees:21,560
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Yıldız Holding

Yıldız Holding

-
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
the LEGO Group

the LEGO Group

-
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 Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Yıldız Holding in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for the LEGO Group in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Yıldız Holding (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Yıldız Holding cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - the LEGO Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

the LEGO Group 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...
Yıldız Holding

Yıldız Holding

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
the LEGO Group

the LEGO Group

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-81203
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in SourceCodester Simple Online Food Ordering System 1.0. This affects an unknown function of the file /admin/ajax.php?action=login2. The manipulation of the argument email leads to sql injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
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-2026-80158
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in the ipa_getkeytab module of the community.general Ansible collection. The module's bind_pw parameter, used to supply the LDAP simple-bind password when retrieving a Kerberos keytab, is not declared with no_log, unlike the sibling password parameter in the same module. As a consequence, the supplied IPA/LDAP bind password is recorded in cleartext in the managed host's system journal/syslog (the module's "Invoked with" record), is included in the module's return values and verbose (-v) output, and is displayed in Automation Controller / AWX job output. The password is additionally passed on the command line to the ipa-getkeytab helper (as --bindpw <value>), exposing it in the process list to local users while the command runs. An attacker able to read these logs, job output, or the process table can obtain the directory bind credential, potentially compromising the accounts and objects that credential can access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-75340
SUMMARY

The device metadata import interface /device/instance/{productId}/property-metadata/import of jetlinks community 2.11 is vulnerable to Server-side request forgery (SSRF).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75338
SUMMARY

disconf (Distributed Configuration Management Platform) 2.6.36 is vulnerable to Incorrect Access Control. The config-fetching APIs /api/config/item, /api/config/file, /api/config/list and /api/config/simple/list are exposed without authentication. The LoginInterceptor explicitly whitelists these four paths, so any anonymous attacker can read every configuration item and configuration file managed by the config center.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-75336
SUMMARY

Funiture 1.0.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the backend tool interfaces /sys/tool/select.json and /sys/tool/update.json.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-26
UPDATED
Date2026-08-26
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA