Comparison Overview
ZARA

ZARA
Arteixo, A Coruña, ES, 15143
Last Update: 31/05/2026
Zara is a forward-thinking force in fashion; embodying what is possible when responsibility and aspiration are accessible to all. By bringing more thoughtful style to the world, we aim to provide everyone, no matter where they are, with the inspiringly beautiful, always...

Yves Rocher
7 chemin de Bretagne, Issy les Moulineaux , 92130, FR
Last Update: 02/04/2026
🌿 Welcome to Yves Rocher, Creator of Botanical Beauty. For 65 years, the Brand has combined botanical effectiveness and consideration of CSR issues. A pioneer in plant-based cosmetics, it is today the No.1* Beauty Brand in France, and shines in all four corners of the...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

ZARA







Yves Rocher






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)
ZARA has 61.29% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Retail Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Yves Rocher in 2026.
Incident History - ZARA (X = Date, Y = Severity)
ZARA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Yves Rocher (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Yves Rocher cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

ZARA

Yves Rocher
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the Alarm/Conditions wrapper when processing PublishResponse EventNotificationList data
- https://github.com/gff-cw/information/issues/18
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/S2OPC_Toolkit_1.7.3/src/ClientServer/address_space/sopc_event_manager.c
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/S2OPC_Toolkit_1.7.3/src/ClientServer/frontend/client_wrapper/alarm_conditions/libs2opc_client_alarm_conditions.c
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/S2OPC_Toolkit_1.7.3/src/ClientServer/frontend/client_wrapper/internal/state_machine.c
- https://gitlab.com/systerel/S2OPC/-/work_items/1781
Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path
- https://github.com/gff-cw/information/issues/16
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/master/samples/ClientServer/client_wrapper/examples/subscribe.c
- https://github.com/systerel/S2OPC/blob/master/src/ClientServer/frontend/client_wrapper/internal/state_machine.c
- https://gitlab.com/systerel/S2OPC/-/work_items/1780
In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.
H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.
H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.