Comparison Overview

Dia Art Foundation

VS

Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo

Dia Art Foundation

US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.diaart.org

Established in 1974, Dia Art Foundation is internationally recognized as one of the world's most influential contemporary art institutions. The name "Dia," taken from the Greek word meaning "through," was chosen to suggest the institution's role in enabling visionary artistic projects that might not otherwise be realized because of their scale or ambition. Dia's founders, Heiner Friedrich and Philippa de Menil, wished to extend the boundaries of the traditional museum to respond to the needs of the generation of artists whose work matured and became prominent during the 1960s and 1970s. Ever since, Dia's mission has been to commission, support, and present site-specific long-term installations and single-artists exhibitions to the public.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 130
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo

5640 IH-35 S., New Braunfels, Texas, 78132, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799
http://awsfzoo.com

It is Animal World & Snake Farm’s Zoo’s mission to protect biodiversity, promote animal welfare, encourage sustainable living practices and empower communities to care about the world in which we inhabit. Our vision is to become a leader in the use of education and conservation to empower our communities— both local and global— to help create a diverse, thriving and sustainable natural world.

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/dia-art-foundation.jpeg
Dia Art 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/animal-world-snake-farm-zoo.jpeg
Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo
—
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
Dia Art Foundation
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo
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 Dia Art Foundation in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo in 2026.

Incident History — Dia Art Foundation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Dia Art Foundation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/dia-art-foundation.jpeg
Dia Art Foundation
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/animal-world-snake-farm-zoo.jpeg
Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Dia Art Foundation company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Dia Art Foundation company.

In the current year, Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company and Dia Art Foundation company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company nor Dia Art Foundation company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company nor Dia Art Foundation company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company nor Dia Art Foundation company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Dia Art Foundation company nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Dia Art Foundation nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Dia Art Foundation company nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Dia Art Foundation company employs more people globally than Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Dia Art Foundation nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Dia Art Foundation nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Dia Art Foundation nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Dia Art Foundation nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Dia Art Foundation nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Dia Art Foundation nor Animal World & Snake Farm Zoo holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper validation of specified type of input in M365 Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
References
Description

Moonraker is a Python web server providing API access to Klipper 3D printing firmware. In versions 0.9.3 and below, instances configured with the "ldap" component enabled are vulnerable to LDAP search filter injection techniques via the login endpoint. The 401 error response message can be used to determine whether or not a search was successful, allowing for brute force methods to discover LDAP entries on the server such as user IDs and user attributes. This issue has been fixed in version 0.10.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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

Runtipi is a Docker-based, personal homeserver orchestrator that facilitates multiple services on a single server. Versions 3.7.0 and above allow an authenticated user to execute arbitrary system commands on the host server by injecting shell metacharacters into backup filenames. The BackupManager fails to sanitize the filenames of uploaded backups. The system persists user-uploaded files directly to the host filesystem using the raw originalname provided in the request. This allows an attacker to stage a file containing shell metacharacters (e.g., $(id).tar.gz) at a predictable path, which is later referenced during the restore process. The successful storage of the file is what allows the subsequent restore command to reference and execute it. This issue has been fixed in version 4.7.0.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References