Comparison Overview

East Bay Center for the Performing Arts

VS

Charleston Stage

East Bay Center for the Performing Arts

339 11th St, Richmond, California, 94801, US
Last Update: 2025-12-12
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.eastbaycenter.org

East Bay Center for the Performing Arts, located in the heart of Richmond, California since 1968, engages the youth and young adults in imagining and creating new worlds for themselves and new visions for their communities through the inspiration and discipline of rigorous training in music, film, theater, and dance. http://eastbaycenter.org

NAICS: 711
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 59
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Charleston Stage

135 Church Street, Charleston, SC, 29401, US
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 750 and 799
http://www.charlestonstage.com

Charleston Stage, founded by Playwright Julian Wiles in 1978, is South Carolina’s largest professional theatre company in residence at the Historic Dock Street Theatre. Charleston Stage has presented over 150 productions and played to a collective audience of over one million strong. Charleston Stage employs 30+ full-time staff members, guest artists, and scores of actors, dancers, singers and musicians and TheatreWings High School Apprentices. The mission of Charleston Stage is to produce live theatre of the highest caliber focusing on plays which excite and incite the imagination, and include original works that celebrate the rich heritage and history of the South Carolina Lowcountry. Charleston Stage celebrates the spirit of discovery by providing a collaborative learning environment in which theatre professionals share their talents with the young people, teachers and schools in the community, and inspire participants to celebrate their own creativity.

NAICS: 711
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 51
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/eastbaycenter.jpeg
East Bay Center for the Performing Arts
—
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/charleston-stage.jpeg
Charleston Stage
—
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
East Bay Center for the Performing Arts
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Charleston Stage
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Performing Arts Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for East Bay Center for the Performing Arts in 2025.

Incidents vs Performing Arts Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Charleston Stage in 2025.

Incident History — East Bay Center for the Performing Arts (X = Date, Y = Severity)

East Bay Center for the Performing Arts cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Charleston Stage (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Charleston Stage cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/eastbaycenter.jpeg
East Bay Center for the Performing Arts
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/charleston-stage.jpeg
Charleston Stage
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company and Charleston Stage company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Charleston Stage company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company.

In the current year, Charleston Stage company and East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Charleston Stage company nor East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Charleston Stage company nor East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Charleston Stage company nor East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company nor Charleston Stage company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts nor Charleston Stage holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company nor Charleston Stage company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

East Bay Center for the Performing Arts company employs more people globally than Charleston Stage company, reflecting its scale as a Performing Arts.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts nor Charleston Stage holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts nor Charleston Stage holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts nor Charleston Stage holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts nor Charleston Stage holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts nor Charleston Stage holds HIPAA certification.

Neither East Bay Center for the Performing Arts nor Charleston Stage holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
References
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
References
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Published
Date
2025-12-14
Updated
Date
2025-12-14
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References