Comparison Overview

Brighton District Library

VS

Genealogical Forum of Oregon

Brighton District Library

None
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 800 and 849

Mission Statement: The Library connects individuals to the world’s cultural and information resources. Vision Statement: In support of the Library’s mission, we will: Be the source for educational, informational, recreational and cultural resources and activities for all members of our community; Create attractive, functional and sustainable environments which facilitate interaction with Library resources; Continuously deliver excellent customer service. Values: The Library centers its work around these values: We open our doors, services and resources to all members of our community; We believe in intellectual freedom; We protect everyone’s right to privacy and confidentiality; We work hard to deliver courteous, equitable and unbiased service; We carefully sustain the resources entrusted to us; We are part of our community

NAICS: 51912
NAICS Definition: Libraries and Archives
Employees: 29
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Genealogical Forum of Oregon

2505 SE 11th Ave, Suite B-18, Portland, Oregon, 97202-1061, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

The Genealogical Forum of Oregon Library is the northwest's premiere place to research your family history. Our collection of 50,000 holdings has regional, national, and world-wide resources. We offer nearly 200 free classes and special interest groups each year to help you with your research. We are an all-volunteer organization with no paid staff, but we are open seven days a week, and one evening. Please go to our website for more information.

NAICS: 51912
NAICS Definition: Libraries and Archives
Employees: 4
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/brighton-district-library.jpeg
Brighton District Library
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/genealogical-forum-of-oregon.jpeg
Genealogical Forum of Oregon
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
Brighton District Library
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Genealogical Forum of Oregon
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Libraries Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Brighton District Library in 2025.

Incidents vs Libraries Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Genealogical Forum of Oregon in 2025.

Incident History — Brighton District Library (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Brighton District Library cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Genealogical Forum of Oregon (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Genealogical Forum of Oregon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/brighton-district-library.jpeg
Brighton District Library
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/genealogical-forum-of-oregon.jpeg
Genealogical Forum of Oregon
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Brighton District Library company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Genealogical Forum of Oregon company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Genealogical Forum of Oregon company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Brighton District Library company.

In the current year, Genealogical Forum of Oregon company and Brighton District Library company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Genealogical Forum of Oregon company nor Brighton District Library company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Genealogical Forum of Oregon company nor Brighton District Library company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Genealogical Forum of Oregon company nor Brighton District Library company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Brighton District Library company nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Brighton District Library nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Brighton District Library company nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Brighton District Library company employs more people globally than Genealogical Forum of Oregon company, reflecting its scale as a Libraries.

Neither Brighton District Library nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Brighton District Library nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Brighton District Library nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Brighton District Library nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Brighton District Library nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Brighton District Library nor Genealogical Forum of Oregon holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H