Comparison Overview

Clemson University

VS

University of Birmingham

Clemson University

201 Sikes Hall, Clemson, SC, US, 29630
Last Update: 2026-01-24
View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://go.tig.rs/r2mdym

For over 130 years, Clemson University has shown unwavering dedication to the people of South Carolina. The University was founded with a land-grant mission and innovative vision — to increase the material resources of the State as a high seminary of learning. Since that time, the University has grown in esteem and impact, earning the R1 classification as one of the nation’s most active research institutions, developing international leaders and instilling our core values of honesty, integrity and respect in more than 160,000 graduates. At Clemson, we see the potential in diverse fields, unexpected applications and determined individuals. Join our journey to develop the skills and inspire the hearts of Tigers working to create significant impact in the profession that calls their name.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 11,690
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
View Profile

University of Birmingham

University of Birmingham, Birmingham, West Midlands, B15 2TT, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 750 and 799
http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/

Welcome to the official LinkedIn page for the University of Birmingham . We have been challenging and developing great minds for more than a century. Characterised by a tradition of innovation, research at the University has broken new ground, pushed forward the boundaries of knowledge and made an impact on people’s lives. View our comment moderation policy here: https://linktr.ee/unibirmingham

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 13,839
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/clemson-university.jpeg
Clemson University
—
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/university-of-birmingham.jpeg
University of Birmingham
—
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
Clemson University
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
University of Birmingham
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

Clemson University has 50.0% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for University of Birmingham in 2026.

Incident History — Clemson University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Clemson University cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — University of Birmingham (X = Date, Y = Severity)

University of Birmingham cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/clemson-university.jpeg
Clemson University
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2026
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Social Engineering (Phone-based Phishing)
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/university-of-birmingham.jpeg
University of Birmingham
Incidents

Date Detected: 05/2020
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

University of Birmingham company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Clemson University company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Clemson University and University of Birmingham have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Clemson University company has reported more cyber incidents than University of Birmingham company.

Neither University of Birmingham company nor Clemson University company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both University of Birmingham company and Clemson University company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither University of Birmingham company nor Clemson University company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Clemson University company nor University of Birmingham company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Clemson University nor University of Birmingham holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

University of Birmingham company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Clemson University company.

University of Birmingham company employs more people globally than Clemson University company, reflecting its scale as a Higher Education.

Neither Clemson University nor University of Birmingham holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Clemson University nor University of Birmingham holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Clemson University nor University of Birmingham holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Clemson University nor University of Birmingham holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Clemson University nor University of Birmingham holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Clemson University nor University of Birmingham holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Typemill is a flat-file, Markdown-based CMS designed for informational documentation websites. A reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) exists in the login error view template `login.twig` of versions 2.19.1 and below. The `username` value can be echoed back without proper contextual encoding when authentication fails. An attacker can execute script in the login page context. This issue has been fixed in version 2.19.2.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
References
Description

A DOM-based Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the DomainCheckerApp class within domain/script.js of Sourcecodester Domain Availability Checker v1.0. The vulnerability occurs because the application improperly handles user-supplied data in the createResultElement method by using the unsafe innerHTML property to render domain search results.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
References
Description

A Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability exists in Sourcecodester Modern Image Gallery App v1.0 within the gallery/upload.php component. The application fails to properly validate uploaded file contents. Additionally, the application preserves the user-supplied file extension during the save process. This allows an unauthenticated attacker to upload arbitrary PHP code by spoofing the MIME type as an image, leading to full system compromise.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
References
Description

A UNIX symbolic link following issue in the jailer component in Firecracker version v1.13.1 and earlier and 1.14.0 on Linux may allow a local host user with write access to the pre-created jailer directories to overwrite arbitrary host files via a symlink attack during the initialization copy at jailer startup, if the jailer is executed with root privileges. To mitigate this issue, users should upgrade to version v1.13.2 or 1.14.1 or above.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 6.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H/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
References
Description

An information disclosure vulnerability exists in the /srvs/membersrv/getCashiers endpoint of the Aptsys gemscms backend platform thru 2025-05-28. This unauthenticated endpoint returns a list of cashier accounts, including names, email addresses, usernames, and passwords hashed using MD5. As MD5 is a broken cryptographic function, the hashes can be easily reversed using public tools, exposing user credentials in plaintext. This allows remote attackers to perform unauthorized logins and potentially gain access to sensitive POS operations or backend functions.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
References