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

Comparison Overview

Żabka GroupŻabka Group
VS
Toys"R"UsToys"R"Us
Żabka Group

Żabka Group

N/A

Last Update: 03/08/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://zabkagroup.com/
669/1000Weak

Żabka Group – The Ultimate Convenience Ecosystem 🟩 Żabka Group is a modern convenience ecosystem with a mission to simplify everyday life. At its core is Żabka Polska – Poland’s leading convenience retailer, operating over 12 000 franchise stores and autonomous Żabka...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:94
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Toys"R"Us

Toys"R"Us

Parsippany, 07054, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.toysrus.com
791/1000Fair

Toys“R”Us is a beloved brand known all around the world—and we know how to have fun! For over 70 years we've been the toy authority and ambassadors of all things play. Our new vision looks beyond traditional retail for a re-imagined, immersive experience for kids of all...

NAICS:43
NAICS Definition:Retail Trade
Employees:13,652
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Żabka Group

Żabka 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
Toys"R"Us

Toys"R"Us

-
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)

Żabka Group has 45.36% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Toys"R"Us in 2026.

Incidents

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

Żabka Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Toys"R"Us (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Toys"R"Us 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...
Żabka Group

Żabka Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ACCZABNETBLU1785752860
Toys"R"Us

Toys"R"Us

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16174
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified about a potential gap in Netskope Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) running on Windows systems. Successful exploitation of the gap could potentially allow a privileged user to send a crafted message to the EPDLP process port to trigger an integer overflow, leading to memory corruption. Successful exploitation would require the EPDLP module to be enabled in the client configuration, and that Memory Integrity is disabled. A successful exploit could potentially result in a denial-of-service, arbitrary code execution, or privilege escalation on the local machine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-16172
SUMMARY

Netskope was notified of an out-of-bounds heap read affecting the Endpoint DLP (EPDLP) service of the Netskope Client. A local standard user could potentially send a specially crafted message that is not properly validated with a bounds check, likely crashing the kernel driver handler. Successful exploitation could potentially crash the EPDLP service, temporarily interrupting DLP enforcement. A successful exploit could potentially also reveal per-boot memory layout information to unauthorized users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-87958
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 is vulnerable to a denial of service where a specific functionality on a Db2 server can be disabled by a privileged user under certain conditions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-86093
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an attacker with the ability to control or impersonate a DRDA server endpoint to execute arbitrary commands on Db2 clients due to a stack-based buffer overflow that improperly copies user-controlled data into a fixed-size stack buffer without bounds checking.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86087
SUMMARY

IBM Db2 11.5.0 through 11.5.9, and 12.1.0 through 12.1.5 could allow an authenticated user to send a specially crafted request to write arbitrary files on the system.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-10
UPDATED
Date2026-09-10
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8