Comparison Overview

Building Communities

VS

Microsoft Research

Building Communities

P.O. Box 1088, Baker City, Oregon, 97814, US
Last Update: 2025-12-03

Building Communities offers American communities a new, expeditious, and comprehensive approach to envision and enact their future. Building Communities offers 25 executable economic development strategies designed to improve the economic condition of communities and to improve the overall quality of life. Based upon the concept of comparative advantage, community leaders assess their relative strengths and weaknesses with respect to 85 key success factors, and a prioritized list of up to 25 strategies emerges based upon the viability of the strategy for each community. In order to jump-start the implementation phase, Building Communities then offers dozens of recommended action steps tailored to each strategy. Problems are solved. Solutions are found. Indeed, communities immediately have an objective game plan to enact their desired future.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 4
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Microsoft Research

Redmond, US
Last Update: 2025-12-02

At Microsoft Research, we accelerate scientific discovery and technology innovation to empower every person and organization on the planet to achieve more. We do this by bringing together the best minds across diverse disciplines and backgrounds to take on the most pressing research challenges for Microsoft and for society. Our Research Lens We consider research directions through the lens of the positive impact we aspire to create with and for customers, communities, and all of society.

NAICS: 54172
NAICS Definition: Research and Development in the Social Sciences and Humanities
Employees: None
Subsidiaries: 50
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
10
Attack type number
5

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/building-communities.jpeg
Building Communities
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/microsoftresearch.jpeg
Microsoft Research
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
Building Communities
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Microsoft Research
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Think Tanks Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Building Communities in 2025.

Incidents vs Think Tanks Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Microsoft Research in 2025.

Incident History — Building Communities (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Building Communities cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Microsoft Research (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Microsoft Research cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/building-communities.jpeg
Building Communities
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/microsoftresearch.jpeg
Microsoft Research
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: AI Agent Exploitation (e.g., autonomous decision-making, broad data access), SaaS Infrastructure Compromise (e.g., widely-deployed firewalls), Identity Sprawl (e.g., over-permissioned roles, shadow identities), Synthetic Social Engineering (e.g., deepfakes, adaptive phishing), Critical Infrastructure Targeting (e.g., energy grids, water systems), Supply Chain Attacks (e.g., multi-cloud complexities), Concentrated Infrastructure Risk (e.g., Microsoft, Amazon, Google backbones)
Motivation: Financial Gain (e.g., ransomware, data exfiltration), Geopolitical Disruption (e.g., critical infrastructure sabotage), Espionage (e.g., AI-driven data theft), Market Manipulation (e.g., disrupting cloud providers), Talent Pipeline Exploitation (e.g., targeting entry-level job gaps)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Malicious Extension (VS Code Marketplace), Trojanized npm Packages, GitHub C2, Postinstall Scripts
Motivation: Testing/Experimental (susvsex), Financial Gain (Vidar Infostealer), Data Theft
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Microsoft Teams Chats/Messages, Malicious Links/Files in Teams, Fake Profiles/Impersonation, Exploiting Privacy Mode Disabled, Guest/External Access Abuse, Public Meeting Links, Teams as Command-and-Control (C2), Ransom Demands via Teams
Motivation: Financial Gain (e.g., Ransomware, Data Theft), Espionage (Corporate/State), Credential Theft, Lateral Movement in Target Networks, Disruption (e.g., Locking Personal/Work Files)
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Microsoft Research company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Building Communities company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Microsoft Research company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Building Communities company has not reported any.

In the current year, Microsoft Research company has reported more cyber incidents than Building Communities company.

Microsoft Research company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Building Communities company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Microsoft Research company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Building Communities company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Microsoft Research company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Building Communities company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Microsoft Research company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Building Communities company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Building Communities nor Microsoft Research holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Microsoft Research company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Building Communities company.

Neither Building Communities nor Microsoft Research holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Building Communities nor Microsoft Research holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Building Communities nor Microsoft Research holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Building Communities nor Microsoft Research holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Building Communities nor Microsoft Research holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Building Communities nor Microsoft Research holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Sigstore Timestamp Authority is a service for issuing RFC 3161 timestamps. Prior to 2.0.3, Function api.ParseJSONRequest currently splits (via a call to strings.Split) an optionally-provided OID (which is untrusted data) on periods. Similarly, function api.getContentType splits the Content-Type header (which is also untrusted data) on an application string. As a result, in the face of a malicious request with either an excessively long OID in the payload containing many period characters or a malformed Content-Type header, a call to api.ParseJSONRequest or api.getContentType incurs allocations of O(n) bytes (where n stands for the length of the function's argument). This vulnerability is fixed in 2.0.3.

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

Monkeytype is a minimalistic and customizable typing test. In 25.49.0 and earlier, there is improper handling of user input which allows an attacker to execute malicious javascript on anyone viewing a malicious quote submission. quote.text and quote.source are user input, and they're inserted straight into the DOM. If they contain HTML tags, they will be rendered (after some escaping using quotes and textarea tags).

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/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

SysReptor is a fully customizable pentest reporting platform. Prior to 2025.102, there is a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability allows authenticated users to execute malicious JavaScript in the context of other logged-in users by uploading malicious JavaScript files in the web UI. This vulnerability is fixed in 2025.102.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Taiko Alethia is an Ethereum-equivalent, permissionless, based rollup designed to scale Ethereum without compromising its fundamental properties. In 2.3.1 and earlier, TaikoInbox._verifyBatches (packages/protocol/contracts/layer1/based/TaikoInbox.sol:627-678) advanced the local tid to whatever transition matched the current blockHash before knowing whether that batch would actually be verified. When the loop later broke (e.g., cooldown window not yet passed or transition invalidated), the function still wrote that newer tid into batches[lastVerifiedBatchId].verifiedTransitionId after decrementing batchId. Result: the last verified batch could end up pointing at a transition index from the next batch (often zeroed), corrupting the verified chain pointer.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
Description

A flaw has been found in youlaitech youlai-mall 1.0.0/2.0.0. Affected is the function getById/updateAddress/deleteAddress of the file /mall-ums/app-api/v1/addresses/. Executing manipulation can lead to improper control of dynamically-identified variables. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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