Comparison Overview

ZAMP

VS

Chili's

ZAMP

São Paulo, 05501-050, BR
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 750 and 799

Somos um grande ecossistema de restaurantes que reúne marcas internacionais como Burger King®, Popeyes®, Starbucks® e Subway®. E, por trás de cada receita de sucesso, estão os Zampers: gente que faz acontecer, que joga junto e que deixa sua marca todos os dias. Aqui, a gente acredita que o verdadeiro sabor do sucesso é ter espaço pra criar, crescer, liderar e ser quem você é. Usamos tecnologia, inovação e muita parceria para entregar experiências que surpreendem nossos clientes e geram oportunidades para o nosso time. Temos apetite pelo futuro e ousadia para conquistar novos mercados, novos sabores e novas conexões. Porque grandes marcas só existem quando grandes pessoas constroem algo maior do que elas mesmas. Isso é a Zamp®: um ecossistema de restaurantes e pessoas em constante evolução.

NAICS: 7225
NAICS Definition: Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees: 11,009
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Chili's

3000 Olympus Blvd, Dallas, Texas, 75019, US
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 750 and 799

Chili's opened as a fun Dallas burger joint with a loyalty to happy hour and blue jeans. We prided ourselves on our humble beginnings, following a devotion to great food, warm hospitality and community spirit. Today, with restaurants all over the world, we continue to cook up the best in casual fare, offering the same genuine service we did way back when. And, just as in 1975, we're committed to giving back to the communities that have helped us grow. Driven to perform? Insist on loving what you do? Then you have a lot in common with us. If you’re passionate about delivering hospitality to every guest, every day, please visit us online today at ChilisJobs.com.

NAICS: 7225
NAICS Definition: Restaurants and Other Eating Places
Employees: 28,424
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/zamp.jpeg
ZAMP
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/chili's.jpeg
Chili's
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
ZAMP
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Chili's
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ZAMP in 2025.

Incidents vs Restaurants Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Chili's in 2025.

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

ZAMP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Chili's (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chili's cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/zamp.jpeg
ZAMP
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chili's.jpeg
Chili's
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2018
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Chili's company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to ZAMP company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Chili's company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas ZAMP company has not reported any.

In the current year, Chili's company and ZAMP company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Chili's company nor ZAMP company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Chili's company has disclosed at least one data breach, while ZAMP company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Chili's company nor ZAMP company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither ZAMP company nor Chili's company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither ZAMP nor Chili's holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Chili's company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to ZAMP company.

Chili's company employs more people globally than ZAMP company, reflecting its scale as a Restaurants.

Neither ZAMP nor Chili's holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither ZAMP nor Chili's holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither ZAMP nor Chili's holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither ZAMP nor Chili's holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither ZAMP nor Chili's holds HIPAA certification.

Neither ZAMP nor Chili's holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
Description

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N