Comparison Overview

Colorado Railroad Museum

VS

Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco

Colorado Railroad Museum

17155 W 44th Ave, Golden, Colorado, 80403, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22

At the Colorado Railroad Museum in Golden, we are "Still On Track" after two challenging years of the pandemic. For 2022, we're growing and expanding! Open Tuesday-Sunday and featuring more than 100 narrow and standard gauge steam and diesel locomotives, passenger cars, cabooses and even a G-scale garden railway within our 15-acre railyard. Also, view changing exhibit galleries and a massive HO-scale model railroad, visit the renowned research library, and visit a working roundhouse restoration facility and hand-powered turntable. Stop by the Depot Store with thousands of train gifts for every rail enthusiast. There's something for everyone at the Colorado Railroad Museum! For more information, visit www.ColoradoRailroadMuseum.org.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 34
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco

750 Kearny St., 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94108, US
Last Update: 2026-01-07
Between 750 and 799

Chinese Culture Center, under the aegis of the Chinese Culture Foundation, is dedicated to elevating underserved communities and giving voice to equality through education and contemporary arts programming. We elevate Chinatown and other underserved communities by empowering youth and residents. Founded in 1965 and rooted in Chinatown, the Chinese Culture Center (or CCC) believes in a comprehensive community-building strategy that combines arts and education to create strong neighborhoods. Furthermore, we see Chinatown as a model of creativity and resilience for all underserved communities. We are a community-focused arts nonprofit. Our work is based in Chinatown and San Francisco's open and public spaces, and other art institutions. CCC’s activities include public art, contemporary exhibitions, and education programming. Over 150,000 members of the community engage with CCC annually. CCC is a proud partner of #StartSmall, the prestigious Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, San Francisco Foundation, Wells Fargo Foundation and the National Endowment for the Arts.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 21
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/colorado-railroad-museum.jpeg
Colorado Railroad 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/chinese-culture-center-of-san-francisco.jpeg
Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco
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
Colorado Railroad Museum
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco
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 Colorado Railroad Museum in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco in 2026.

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

Colorado Railroad Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/colorado-railroad-museum.jpeg
Colorado Railroad Museum
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chinese-culture-center-of-san-francisco.jpeg
Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Colorado Railroad Museum company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Colorado Railroad Museum company.

In the current year, Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company and Colorado Railroad Museum company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company nor Colorado Railroad Museum company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company nor Colorado Railroad Museum company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company nor Colorado Railroad Museum company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum company nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum company nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Colorado Railroad Museum company employs more people globally than Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Colorado Railroad Museum nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N