Comparison Overview

Allen County Public Library

VS

Maricopa County Library District

Allen County Public Library

900 Library Plaza, Fort Wayne, Indiana, 46802, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Our mission: Enriching the community through lifelong learning and discovery. The Allen County Public Library provides unlimited education, entertainment and information to the people of Allen County, Indiana and beyond. Working together, staff at our 15 locations offer physical and digital materials, computer access, classes, art exhibitions, programming, databases, custom reference services and more to all ages. Some people walk through our doors and others access the library online. However you decide to visit, know that customer service is our number one priority. We are here to serve you!

NAICS: 51912
NAICS Definition: Libraries and Archives
Employees: 269
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Maricopa County Library District

9330 E Riggs Rd, Sun Lakes, Arizona, 85248, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

The Maricopa County Library District (MCLD) is a special taxing district that operates 15 libraries countywide. MCLD’s mission is to provide access and services so residents experience an improved quality of life. Each year, the Library District welcomes nearly 2 million visitors, holds thousands of free events and programs for all ages, and hosts Maricopa County Reads, the award-winning Summer Reading Program. For Maricopa County and Town of Queen Creek residents and property owners, a library card is free. For more information, visit https://mcldaz.org.

NAICS: 519
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 138
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/allen-county-public-library.jpeg
Allen County Public Library
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/mcldaz.jpeg
Maricopa County Library District
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
Allen County Public Library
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Maricopa County Library District
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Libraries Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Allen County Public Library in 2025.

Incidents vs Libraries Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Maricopa County Library District in 2025.

Incident History — Allen County Public Library (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Allen County Public Library cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Maricopa County Library District (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Maricopa County Library District cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/allen-county-public-library.jpeg
Allen County Public Library
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mcldaz.jpeg
Maricopa County Library District
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Allen County Public Library company and Maricopa County Library District company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Maricopa County Library District company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Allen County Public Library company.

In the current year, Maricopa County Library District company and Allen County Public Library company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Maricopa County Library District company nor Allen County Public Library company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Maricopa County Library District company nor Allen County Public Library company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Maricopa County Library District company nor Allen County Public Library company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Allen County Public Library company nor Maricopa County Library District company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Allen County Public Library nor Maricopa County Library District holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Allen County Public Library company nor Maricopa County Library District company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Allen County Public Library company employs more people globally than Maricopa County Library District company, reflecting its scale as a Libraries.

Neither Allen County Public Library nor Maricopa County Library District holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Allen County Public Library nor Maricopa County Library District holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Allen County Public Library nor Maricopa County Library District holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Allen County Public Library nor Maricopa County Library District holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Allen County Public Library nor Maricopa County Library District holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Allen County Public Library nor Maricopa County Library District holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H