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

Comparison Overview

Acer for EducationAcer for Education
VS
Hillsborough County Public SchoolsHillsborough County Public Schools
Acer for Education

Acer for Education

Lugano, 6932, CH

Last Update: 25/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://acer.link/4cGH0zX
773/1000Fair

BRINGING INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES TO THE SCHOOLS OF TOMORROW. Acer for Education looks at 21st Century Skills as a way to re-envision learning and prepare students for a rapidly evolving global and technological world. Acer for Education offers a dynamic learning exper...

NAICS:6111
NAICS Definition:Elementary and Secondary Schools
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:14
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Hillsborough County Public Schools

Hillsborough County Public Schools

US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
740/1000Moderate

Hillsborough County Public Schools is the seventh largest school district in the nation, with more than 210,000 students. More than 50,000 students attend a school through one of the district’s many school choice programs. HCPS is the largest employer in Hillsborough C...

NAICS:6111
NAICS Definition:Elementary and Secondary Schools
Employees:13,483
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Acer for Education

Acer for Education

-
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
Hillsborough County Public Schools

Hillsborough County Public Schools

-
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 Primary and Secondary Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Acer for Education in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Primary and Secondary Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hillsborough County Public Schools in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Acer for Education (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Acer for Education cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Hillsborough County Public Schools (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hillsborough County Public Schools cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Acer for Education

Acer for Education

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Hillsborough County Public Schools

Hillsborough County Public Schools

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
HIL204517923

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2