Comparison Overview

Croton-on-Hudson, New York

VS

Preservation Connecticut

Croton-on-Hudson, New York

undefined, undefined, undefined, 10520, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://crotononhudson-ny.gov

A village of circa 8,000 located on the shores of the Hudson and Croton Rivers with excellent rail service just 35 track miles from mid-town Manhattan, Croton-on-Hudson, New York, is approximately 5 square miles in land area (and just under that in water area). Croton offers miles of walking trails and riverfront access and is home to Historic Hudson Valley's 18th century Van Cortlandt Manor and the 508-acre Croton Point County Park on a peninsula in the Hudson River.

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition: Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support
Employees: 18
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Preservation Connecticut

940 Whitney Ave., Hamden, CT, 06517, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749
http://www.preservationct.org

For over four decades, we have successfully championed the protection of remarkable community assets all over the state by leveraging funding, advocating, forming partnerships, and promoting stewardship. We believe that preservation truly matters. It matters because historic places connect us to the lessons, techniques, stories and people of the past. They evoke emotions and memories. Some are considered sacred. The historic places we choose to preserve speak to our identity and reflect our values as a society. In addition, preservation and sustainability go hand in hand. Historic buildings tend to be built better and are more comfortable than current construction. Their warm materials often appeal to the heart. And the “greenest” building is a building that’s lasted for generations.

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 18
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/croton-on-hudson-new-york.jpeg
Croton-on-Hudson, New York
—
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/connecticut-trust-for-historic-preservation.jpeg
Preservation Connecticut
—
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
Croton-on-Hudson, New York
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Preservation Connecticut
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Croton-on-Hudson, New York in 2025.

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Preservation Connecticut in 2025.

Incident History — Croton-on-Hudson, New York (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Croton-on-Hudson, New York cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Preservation Connecticut (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Preservation Connecticut cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/croton-on-hudson-new-york.jpeg
Croton-on-Hudson, New York
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/connecticut-trust-for-historic-preservation.jpeg
Preservation Connecticut
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Croton-on-Hudson, New York company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Preservation Connecticut company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Preservation Connecticut company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Croton-on-Hudson, New York company.

In the current year, Preservation Connecticut company and Croton-on-Hudson, New York company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Preservation Connecticut company nor Croton-on-Hudson, New York company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Preservation Connecticut company nor Croton-on-Hudson, New York company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Preservation Connecticut company nor Croton-on-Hudson, New York company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York company nor Preservation Connecticut company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York nor Preservation Connecticut holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York company nor Preservation Connecticut company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Both Croton-on-Hudson, New York company and Preservation Connecticut company employ a similar number of people globally.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York nor Preservation Connecticut holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York nor Preservation Connecticut holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York nor Preservation Connecticut holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York nor Preservation Connecticut holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York nor Preservation Connecticut holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Croton-on-Hudson, New York nor Preservation Connecticut 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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References