Comparison Overview

Minneapolis Institute of Art

VS

Hampshire Cultural Trust

Minneapolis Institute of Art

2400 Third Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN, 55404, US
Last Update: 2025-12-02
Between 750 and 799

The Minneapolis Institute of Art (Mia) enriches the community by collecting, preserving, and making accessible outstanding works of art from the world’s diverse cultures. Mia's permanent collection has grown from 800 works of art to almost 90,000 thousand objects. The collection includes world-famous works that embody the highest levels of artistic achievement, spanning five thousand years and representing the world's diverse cultures across all continents. Mia has seven curatorial areas: Arts of Africa & the Americas; Contemporary Art; Decorative Arts, Textiles & Sculpture; Asian Art; Paintings; Photography and New Media; and Prints and Drawings.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 323
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Hampshire Cultural Trust

Chilcomb House, Winchester, undefined, SO32 8RD, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-01

In our museums, arts centres and galleries, we open doors for everyone to be inspired by culture. Our venues are friendly, welcoming places where people come together to discover stories and make memories through our collections, exhibitions, projects and events. We create opportunities for people to experience culture and achieve a positive change in their lives. Each of our venues is different and part of a proud community. These unique places are at the heart of Hampshire Cultural Trust, which brings the skills and expertise to: - Care for our collection of 2.5 million objects, made accessible through our venues - Work creatively to meet the needs of people in our communities, including those who are the hardest to reach or most vulnerable - Present exciting new events and exhibitions, bringing high-quality art and experiences to Hampshire

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 149
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/artsmia.jpeg
Minneapolis Institute of Art
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/hampshire-cultural-trust.jpeg
Hampshire Cultural Trust
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
Minneapolis Institute of Art
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Hampshire Cultural Trust
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Minneapolis Institute of Art in 2025.

Incidents vs Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hampshire Cultural Trust in 2025.

Incident History — Minneapolis Institute of Art (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Minneapolis Institute of Art cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Hampshire Cultural Trust (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hampshire Cultural Trust cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/artsmia.jpeg
Minneapolis Institute of Art
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hampshire-cultural-trust.jpeg
Hampshire Cultural Trust
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Minneapolis Institute of Art company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Hampshire Cultural Trust company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Hampshire Cultural Trust company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Minneapolis Institute of Art company.

In the current year, Hampshire Cultural Trust company and Minneapolis Institute of Art company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Hampshire Cultural Trust company nor Minneapolis Institute of Art company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Hampshire Cultural Trust company nor Minneapolis Institute of Art company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Hampshire Cultural Trust company nor Minneapolis Institute of Art company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art company nor Hampshire Cultural Trust company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art nor Hampshire Cultural Trust holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art company nor Hampshire Cultural Trust company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Minneapolis Institute of Art company employs more people globally than Hampshire Cultural Trust company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art nor Hampshire Cultural Trust holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art nor Hampshire Cultural Trust holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art nor Hampshire Cultural Trust holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art nor Hampshire Cultural Trust holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art nor Hampshire Cultural Trust holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Minneapolis Institute of Art nor Hampshire Cultural Trust holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). Prior to 0.11.1, vllm has a critical remote code execution vector in a config class named Nemotron_Nano_VL_Config. When vllm loads a model config that contains an auto_map entry, the config class resolves that mapping with get_class_from_dynamic_module(...) and immediately instantiates the returned class. This fetches and executes Python from the remote repository referenced in the auto_map string. Crucially, this happens even when the caller explicitly sets trust_remote_code=False in vllm.transformers_utils.config.get_config. In practice, an attacker can publish a benign-looking frontend repo whose config.json points via auto_map to a separate malicious backend repo; loading the frontend will silently run the backend’s code on the victim host. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.11.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

fastify-reply-from is a Fastify plugin to forward the current HTTP request to another server. Prior to 12.5.0, by crafting a malicious URL, an attacker could access routes that are not allowed, even though the reply.from is defined for specific routes in @fastify/reply-from. This vulnerability is fixed in 12.5.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: 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: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

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17, A Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability has been identified in the Angular Template Compiler. It occurs because the compiler's internal security schema is incomplete, allowing attackers to bypass Angular's built-in security sanitization. Specifically, the schema fails to classify certain URL-holding attributes (e.g., those that could contain javascript: URLs) as requiring strict URL security, enabling the injection of malicious scripts. This vulnerability is fixed in 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/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

Gin-vue-admin is a backstage management system based on vue and gin. In 2.8.6 and earlier, attackers can delete any file on the server at will, causing damage or unavailability of server resources. Attackers can control the 'FileMd5' parameter to delete any file and folder.

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

Portkey.ai Gateway is a blazing fast AI Gateway with integrated guardrails. Prior to 1.14.0, the gateway determined the destination baseURL by prioritizing the value in the x-portkey-custom-host request header. The proxy route then appends the client-specified path to perform an external fetch. This can be maliciously used by users for SSRF attacks. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.14.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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