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

Comparison Overview

Arlington Public SchoolsArlington Public Schools
VS
Austin Independent School DistrictAustin Independent School District
Arlington Public Schools

Arlington Public Schools

2110 Washington Blvd, Arlington, 22204, US

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.apsva.us
780/1000Fair

Arlington Public Schools instills a love of learning in its students and prepares them to be responsible and productive global citizens. APS is a diverse and inclusive school community, committed to academic excellence and integrity. We provide instruction in a caring, ...

NAICS:6111
NAICS Definition:Elementary and Secondary Schools
Employees:4,430
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Austin Independent School District

Austin Independent School District

4000 S I H 35, Austin, 78704, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.austinisd.org
786/1000Fair

Austin ISD is a diverse community of more than 10,000 employees, and we recognize that nothing is more essential to a great education system than innovative, talented, passionate educators. Whether you’re a recent graduate or an experienced professional seeking a new ...

NAICS:6111
NAICS Definition:Elementary and Secondary Schools
Employees:11,216
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Arlington Public Schools

Arlington 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
Austin Independent School District

Austin Independent School District

-
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 Arlington Public Schools in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Austin Independent School District in 2026.

Incidents

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

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

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Austin Independent School District (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Austin Independent School District cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Arlington Public Schools

Arlington Public Schools

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Austin Independent School District

Austin Independent School District

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9