Comparison Overview

Colorado Succeeds

VS

Verified Voting Foundation

Colorado Succeeds

730 17th St, Denver, Colorado, 80202, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Founded in 2006, Colorado Succeeds is a non-profit, non-partisan coalition of business leaders committed to immediate and continuous improvement of the state's education system. Our mission is to ensure that every student in Colorado has access to a high-performing school and graduates with the knowledge, skills, and behaviors necessary to succeed in a competitive global economy. As Colorado’s business voice for education reform, our membership is comprised of CEO’s and senior executives from leading corporations around the state. Colorado Succeeds provides the policy, advocacy, and accountability supports necessary to transform Colorado’s public education system by convening business leadership on critical education issues, leading results-oriented advocacy campaigns, and deploying strategic communications tools to inform elected, business, and civic leadership of opportunities to improve the state system and their local schools.

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition: Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support
Employees: 11
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Verified Voting Foundation

1500 Chestnut Street, #2315, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, US, 19102
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

We work with election officials, policymakers, and democracy defenders across party lines to help voters vote and to promote policies that support justified public confidence in elections. Verified Voting’s mission is to strengthen democracy for all voters by promoting the responsible use of technology in elections. Since its founding, our team, Board of Directors, and Board of Advisors have been leading experts on relevant issues in election technology. Our collective technical knowledge has been foundational in understanding where vulnerabilities lie in our elections and in promoting policies and best practices that mitigate risks. We work to understand other experts in the field – experts in election administration because context matters for policy recommendations, experts in diverse voter experiences because not every voter has access to the ballot in the same way, and experts in voter outreach and education because ultimately this work is done for voters. The U.S. has moved toward broader and fairer access to voting, but not without contention and backlash. In this struggle, we are not neutral: we stand with voters. We repudiate attacks on voting rights couched as security measures and believe that security, resilience, and verifiability are integral to free and fair elections. And we recognize that some uses of election technology can systematically disenfranchise voters with disabilities, rural voters, and voters of color.

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition: Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support
Employees: 22
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-succeeds.jpeg
Colorado Succeeds
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/verified-voting-foundation.jpeg
Verified Voting Foundation
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 Succeeds
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Verified Voting Foundation
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Colorado Succeeds in 2025.

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Verified Voting Foundation in 2025.

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

Colorado Succeeds cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Verified Voting Foundation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Verified Voting Foundation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/colorado-succeeds.jpeg
Colorado Succeeds
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/verified-voting-foundation.jpeg
Verified Voting Foundation
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Verified Voting Foundation company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Colorado Succeeds company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Verified Voting Foundation company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Colorado Succeeds company.

In the current year, Verified Voting Foundation company and Colorado Succeeds company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Verified Voting Foundation company nor Colorado Succeeds company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Verified Voting Foundation company nor Colorado Succeeds company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Verified Voting Foundation company nor Colorado Succeeds company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Colorado Succeeds company nor Verified Voting Foundation company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Colorado Succeeds nor Verified Voting Foundation holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Colorado Succeeds company nor Verified Voting Foundation company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Verified Voting Foundation company employs more people globally than Colorado Succeeds company, reflecting its scale as a Public Policy Offices.

Neither Colorado Succeeds nor Verified Voting Foundation holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Colorado Succeeds nor Verified Voting Foundation holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Colorado Succeeds nor Verified Voting Foundation holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Colorado Succeeds nor Verified Voting Foundation holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Colorado Succeeds nor Verified Voting Foundation holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Colorado Succeeds nor Verified Voting Foundation 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