Comparison Overview
University of Colorado Boulder College of Engineering & Applied Science

University of Colorado Boulder College of Engineering & Applied Science
1111 Engineering Drive, Boulder, CO, 80309, US
Last Update: 04/04/2026
Founded in 1893, the College of Engineering and Applied Science at the University of Colorado Boulder is the second largest of seven schools and colleges at one of the nation's top public research institutions. As Colorado's flagship university, CU Boulder has selective...

University of California, San Francisco
530 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, California, US, 94122
Last Update: 01/04/2026
UC San Francisco is driven by the idea that when the best research, the best education and the best patient care converge, great breakthroughs are achieved. We pursue this integrated excellence with singular focus, fueled by collaboration among our top-ranked profession...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

University of Colorado Boulder College of Engineering & Applied Science







University of California, San Francisco






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for University of Colorado Boulder College of Engineering & Applied Science in 2026.
Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for University of California, San Francisco in 2026.
Incident History - University of Colorado Boulder College of Engineering & Applied Science (X = Date, Y = Severity)
University of Colorado Boulder College of Engineering & Applied Science cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - University of California, San Francisco (X = Date, Y = Severity)
University of California, San Francisco cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

University of Colorado Boulder College of Engineering & Applied Science

University of California, San Francisco
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
An authentication bypass vulnerability exists in certain releases of Ciena Navigator Network Control Suite (NCS), Manage Control Plan (MCP), and Blue Planet products. The issue is caused by improper handling of HTTP request paths and headers, which allows an unauthenticated attacker to manipulate requests in a manner that bypasses authentication and associated audit logging controls.
In Ciena's Navigator Network Control Suite (NCS) and Manage Control Plan (MCP), there are hidden system accounts used for internal software operations. Some of these accounts have default passwords that may be predictable. While these accounts have very limited permissions on their own, an attacker could combine an attack using one of these accounts with other potential weaknesses to launch a more significant attack, possibly leading to escalation of privilege on the system.
Buffer Overflow vulnerability in OpenHTJ2K v.0.18.4 and before allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code via the openhtj2k_decoder_impl::invoke, invoke_line_based, invoke_line_based_stream, and invoke_line_based_predecoded function in source/core/interface/decoder.cpp
Buffer Overflow vulnerability in OpenHTJ2K v.0.18.4 and before allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code via the j2k_precinct_subband::parse_packet_header() in source/core/coding/coding_units.cpp
Incorrect access control in the /api/License/deactivateOffline endpoint of CAXPerts UniversalPlantViewer WebServices Server v2.7.6 allows authenticated attackers with low-level privileges to cause a Denial of Service (DoS) via removing the license from the webserver.