Comparison Overview

Birmingham Museums Trust

VS

Museums of Old York

Birmingham Museums Trust

Birmingham Museum & Art Gallery, Birmingham, B3 3DH, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-02

We are Birmingham Museums Trust, the largest independent museum trust in the UK, responsible for managing the museum sites and collections owned by Birmingham City Council. With an encyclopaedic collection of over one million objects and specimens covering art, human history, science and industry, and natural science, our mission is to bring Birmingham out by shining new light on people’s stories, collections and creativity. Between April 2024 – March 2025, we welcomed over 475000 visitors to Birmingham Museum & Art Gallery, Thinktank Birmingham Science Museum, Aston Hall, Blakesley Hall, Museum of the Jewellery Quarter, Sarehole Mill, Soho House, the Museum Collection Centre and Weoley Castle. If you would like to find out more about our latest vacancies, venue hire opportunities or upcoming events, visit our website for more information and contact details. Birmingham Museums Trust is a limited company (Company No: 07737797) and a registered charity (Charity No: 1147014).

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 180
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Museums of Old York

3 Lindsay Road, York, ME, 03909, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

The Museums of Old York is the product of a merger of three historical organizations founded in York with histories dating back more than a hundred years. The Mission of the Museums of Old York is to preserve and promote the rich history of the York region through programs and educational experiences that enhance historical perspective and build on community pride. We have 8 different buildings highlighting various aspects of York life, decorative arts, contemporary art, and social history located throughout York Village.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 6
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/birminghammuseums.jpeg
Birmingham Museums 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/museums-of-old-york.jpeg
Museums of Old York
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
Birmingham Museums Trust
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Museums of Old York
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 Birmingham Museums Trust in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Museums of Old York in 2025.

Incident History — Birmingham Museums Trust (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Birmingham Museums Trust cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Museums of Old York (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Museums of Old York cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/birminghammuseums.jpeg
Birmingham Museums Trust
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/museums-of-old-york.jpeg
Museums of Old York
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Birmingham Museums Trust company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Museums of Old York company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Museums of Old York company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Birmingham Museums Trust company.

In the current year, Museums of Old York company and Birmingham Museums Trust company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Museums of Old York company nor Birmingham Museums Trust company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Museums of Old York company nor Birmingham Museums Trust company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Museums of Old York company nor Birmingham Museums Trust company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust company nor Museums of Old York company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust nor Museums of Old York holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust company nor Museums of Old York company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Birmingham Museums Trust company employs more people globally than Museums of Old York company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust nor Museums of Old York holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust nor Museums of Old York holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust nor Museums of Old York holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust nor Museums of Old York holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust nor Museums of Old York holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Birmingham Museums Trust nor Museums of Old York 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