Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

California State University - East BayCalifornia State University - East Bay
VS
Ghent UniversityGhent University
California State University - East Bay

California State University - East Bay

25800 Carlos Bee Blvd, Hayward, CA, US, 94542

Last Update: 06/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://csueastbay.edu
785/1000Fair

California State University, East Bay is the San Francisco East Bay Area's high-access public university of choice. CSUEB serves the region with campuses in Hayward and Concord, a professional development center in Oakland, and an innovative online campus. With an enrol...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:3,364
Subsidiaries:40
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Ghent University

Ghent University

Universiteitsforum (Ufo) Sint-Pietersnieuwstraat 33, Gent, Gent, east flanders, BE, 9000

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.ugent.be
796/1000Fair

Ghent University is a top 100 university and one of the major universities in Belgium, founded in 1817. Our 11 faculties offer a wide range of courses and conduct in-depth research within a wide range of scientific domains. We are a pluralistic university that is open t...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:11,252
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
California State University - East Bay

California State University - East Bay

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Ghent University

Ghent University

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for California State University - East Bay in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ghent University in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - California State University - East Bay (X = Date, Y = Severity)

California State University - East Bay cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Ghent University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ghent University cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
California State University - East Bay

California State University - East Bay

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Ghent University

Ghent University

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between California State University - East Bay company and Ghent University company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between California State University - East Bay and Ghent University, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between California State University - East Bay and Ghent University, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - California State University - East Bay or Ghent University ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - California State University - East Bay or Ghent University ?
Between California State University - East Bay and Ghent University, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between California State University - East Bay and Ghent University, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2