Comparison Overview
Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation (ASTIF)

Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation (ASTIF)
Sector 125 Road, J-3 Block Room no 114, Noida, 201303, IN
Last Update: 26/03/2026
The primary objective of ASTIF is to promote Research and Innovation in all Amity Institutions, particularly in the cutting edge frontiers, Science and Technology domains of national importance. To meet this objective, ASTIF undertakes a wide spectrum of important activ...

CNRS
3 rue Michel-Ange, Paris, 75016, FR
Last Update: 01/04/2026
The French National Centre for Scientific Research is among the world's leading research institutions. Its scientists explore the living world, matter, the Universe, and the functioning of human societies in order to meet the major challenges of today and tomorrow. Inte...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation (ASTIF)







CNRS






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Research Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation (ASTIF) in 2026.
Incidents vs Research Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for CNRS in 2026.
Incident History - Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation (ASTIF) (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation (ASTIF) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - CNRS (X = Date, Y = Severity)
CNRS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Amity Science, Technology and Innovation Foundation (ASTIF)

CNRS
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.
The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.