Comparison Overview

Fondation Beyeler

VS

Denver Botanic Gardens

Fondation Beyeler

Baselstrasse 101, Riehen, 4125, CH
Last Update: 2026-01-23
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.fondationbeyeler.ch

The Fondation Beyeler is a museum of modern and contemporary art open 365 days a year. It is considered one of the world's most beautiful museums. Its exhibitions of renowned artists of the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries have brought the museum international recognition and established it as Switzerland's most popular art museum. The focus is the visitor's personal and sensory experiences in encountering art and nature.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 111
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Denver Botanic Gardens

1007 York St., Denver, 80206, US
Last Update: 2026-01-23
Between 750 and 799
http://www.botanicgardens.org

Green inside and out, Denver Botanic Gardens is considered one of the top botanical gardens in the United States and a pioneer in water conservation. Accredited by the American Association of Museums, the Gardens’ living collections encompass specimens from the tropics to the tundra, showcasing a plant palette chosen to thrive in Colorado’s semi-arid climate. The Gardens'​ dynamic, 24-acre urban oasis in the heart of the city, offers unforgettable opportunities to flourish with unique garden experiences for the whole family – as well as world-class education and plant conservation research programs. Additional sites at Chatfield Farms, a 700-acre wildlife and native plant refuge in Jefferson County; and Mount Goliath, a high-altitude trail and interpretive site on the Mount Evans Scenic Byway, extend this experience throughout the Front Range.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 323
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/fondation-beyeler.jpeg
Fondation Beyeler
—
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/denver-botanic-gardens.jpeg
Denver Botanic Gardens
—
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
Fondation Beyeler
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Denver Botanic Gardens
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 Fondation Beyeler in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Denver Botanic Gardens in 2026.

Incident History — Fondation Beyeler (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fondation Beyeler cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Denver Botanic Gardens (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Denver Botanic Gardens cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fondation-beyeler.jpeg
Fondation Beyeler
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/denver-botanic-gardens.jpeg
Denver Botanic Gardens
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Denver Botanic Gardens company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Fondation Beyeler company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Denver Botanic Gardens company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Fondation Beyeler company.

In the current year, Denver Botanic Gardens company and Fondation Beyeler company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Denver Botanic Gardens company nor Fondation Beyeler company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Denver Botanic Gardens company nor Fondation Beyeler company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Denver Botanic Gardens company nor Fondation Beyeler company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Fondation Beyeler company nor Denver Botanic Gardens company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Fondation Beyeler nor Denver Botanic Gardens holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Fondation Beyeler company nor Denver Botanic Gardens company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Denver Botanic Gardens company employs more people globally than Fondation Beyeler company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Fondation Beyeler nor Denver Botanic Gardens holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Fondation Beyeler nor Denver Botanic Gardens holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Fondation Beyeler nor Denver Botanic Gardens holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Fondation Beyeler nor Denver Botanic Gardens holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Fondation Beyeler nor Denver Botanic Gardens holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Fondation Beyeler nor Denver Botanic Gardens 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