Comparison Overview

Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum

VS

Groninger Museum

Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum

306 Congress Street, Boston, MA, 02210, US
Last Update: 2026-01-16
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.bostonteapartyships.com

The Boston Tea Party, “the single most important event leading up to the American Revolution,” occurred the night of December 16th 1773. The Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum, owned and operated by Historic Tours of America, is dedicated to accurately reliving that famous event. With a new state-of-the art museum and authentic replica ships; the Beaver and the Eleanor; the attraction will allow visitors to travel back in time to learn and experience the courageous acts of those who forever shaped the course of history.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 45
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Groninger Museum

Museumeiland 1, Groningen, 9711 ME, NL
Last Update: 2026-01-23
Between 750 and 799
http://www.groningermuseum.nl

The Groninger Museum is the The Museum of Art and Art History in the city of Groningen, showing painting, design, photography, fashion, installations, applied art and archeology. The collections and presentations are the foundation of the Groninger Museum. The Groninger Museum is colourful and extrovert and aims at a wide audience. With the presentations, which are of national and international significance, the Groninger Museum hopes to amaze and astound visitors and prompt them towards an opinion.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 129
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/boston-tea-party-ships-&-museum.jpeg
Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum
—
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/groninger-museum.jpeg
Groninger Museum
—
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
Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Groninger Museum
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 Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Groninger Museum in 2026.

Incident History — Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Groninger Museum (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Groninger Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/boston-tea-party-ships-&-museum.jpeg
Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/groninger-museum.jpeg
Groninger Museum
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Groninger Museum company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Groninger Museum company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company.

In the current year, Groninger Museum company and Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Groninger Museum company nor Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Groninger Museum company nor Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Groninger Museum company nor Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company nor Groninger Museum company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum nor Groninger Museum holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company nor Groninger Museum company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Groninger Museum company employs more people globally than Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum nor Groninger Museum holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum nor Groninger Museum holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum nor Groninger Museum holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum nor Groninger Museum holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum nor Groninger Museum holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Boston Tea Party Ships & Museum nor Groninger Museum holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper validation of specified type of input in M365 Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
References
Description

Moonraker is a Python web server providing API access to Klipper 3D printing firmware. In versions 0.9.3 and below, instances configured with the "ldap" component enabled are vulnerable to LDAP search filter injection techniques via the login endpoint. The 401 error response message can be used to determine whether or not a search was successful, allowing for brute force methods to discover LDAP entries on the server such as user IDs and user attributes. This issue has been fixed in version 0.10.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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
References
Description

Runtipi is a Docker-based, personal homeserver orchestrator that facilitates multiple services on a single server. Versions 3.7.0 and above allow an authenticated user to execute arbitrary system commands on the host server by injecting shell metacharacters into backup filenames. The BackupManager fails to sanitize the filenames of uploaded backups. The system persists user-uploaded files directly to the host filesystem using the raw originalname provided in the request. This allows an attacker to stage a file containing shell metacharacters (e.g., $(id).tar.gz) at a predictable path, which is later referenced during the restore process. The successful storage of the file is what allows the subsequent restore command to reference and execute it. This issue has been fixed in version 4.7.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References