Comparison Overview

Fort Ticonderoga

VS

The Museum of Russian Art

Fort Ticonderoga

100 Fort Ti Road., Ticonderoga, NY, US, 12883
Last Update: 2025-12-02

Fort Ticonderoga is an independent nonprofit educational organization, museum, and cultural destination. Welcoming visitors since 1909, it preserves North America’s largest 18th-century artillery collection, 2000 acres of historic landscape on Lake Champlain, and Carillon Battlefield, and the largest series of Revolutionary 18th-century earthworks surviving in America. Fort Ticonderoga engages more than 75,000 visitors each year and offers programs, historic interpretation, boat cruises, tours, demonstrations, and exhibits throughout the year and is open for daily visitation May through October. Fort Ticonderoga is accredited by the American Alliance of Museums and pursues its vision to be the premier cultural destination in North America. Visit www.FortTiconderoga.org for a full list of ongoing programs or call 518-585-2821. Fort Ticonderoga is located at 102 Fort Ti Road, Ticonderoga, New York. Fort Ticonderoga 102 Fort Ti Road. Ticonderoga, NY 12883 (518) 585-2821 www.fortticonderoga.org

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 35
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

The Museum of Russian Art

5500 Stevens Avenue, Minneapolis, 55419, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

The Museum of Russian Art collects, preserves, exhibits, and illuminates the rich artistic tapestry of Russia, past and present, through outstanding exhibitions and public programs for all audiences. The Museum upholds an independent voice and the freedom of expression to carry out its mission unconstrained by influence from foreign governments, political actors and/or corporate or individual interests.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 23
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/fort-ticonderoga.jpeg
Fort Ticonderoga
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/tmora.jpeg
The Museum of Russian Art
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
Fort Ticonderoga
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
The Museum of Russian Art
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 Fort Ticonderoga in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for The Museum of Russian Art in 2025.

Incident History — Fort Ticonderoga (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fort Ticonderoga cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — The Museum of Russian Art (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Museum of Russian Art cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fort-ticonderoga.jpeg
Fort Ticonderoga
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tmora.jpeg
The Museum of Russian Art
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Fort Ticonderoga company and The Museum of Russian Art company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, The Museum of Russian Art company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Fort Ticonderoga company.

In the current year, The Museum of Russian Art company and Fort Ticonderoga company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither The Museum of Russian Art company nor Fort Ticonderoga company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither The Museum of Russian Art company nor Fort Ticonderoga company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither The Museum of Russian Art company nor Fort Ticonderoga company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga company nor The Museum of Russian Art company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga nor The Museum of Russian Art holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga company nor The Museum of Russian Art company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Fort Ticonderoga company employs more people globally than The Museum of Russian Art company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga nor The Museum of Russian Art holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga nor The Museum of Russian Art holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga nor The Museum of Russian Art holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga nor The Museum of Russian Art holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga nor The Museum of Russian Art holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Fort Ticonderoga nor The Museum of Russian Art holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). Prior to 0.11.1, vllm has a critical remote code execution vector in a config class named Nemotron_Nano_VL_Config. When vllm loads a model config that contains an auto_map entry, the config class resolves that mapping with get_class_from_dynamic_module(...) and immediately instantiates the returned class. This fetches and executes Python from the remote repository referenced in the auto_map string. Crucially, this happens even when the caller explicitly sets trust_remote_code=False in vllm.transformers_utils.config.get_config. In practice, an attacker can publish a benign-looking frontend repo whose config.json points via auto_map to a separate malicious backend repo; loading the frontend will silently run the backend’s code on the victim host. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.11.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

fastify-reply-from is a Fastify plugin to forward the current HTTP request to another server. Prior to 12.5.0, by crafting a malicious URL, an attacker could access routes that are not allowed, even though the reply.from is defined for specific routes in @fastify/reply-from. This vulnerability is fixed in 12.5.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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
Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17, A Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability has been identified in the Angular Template Compiler. It occurs because the compiler's internal security schema is incomplete, allowing attackers to bypass Angular's built-in security sanitization. Specifically, the schema fails to classify certain URL-holding attributes (e.g., those that could contain javascript: URLs) as requiring strict URL security, enabling the injection of malicious scripts. This vulnerability is fixed in 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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
Description

Gin-vue-admin is a backstage management system based on vue and gin. In 2.8.6 and earlier, attackers can delete any file on the server at will, causing damage or unavailability of server resources. Attackers can control the 'FileMd5' parameter to delete any file and folder.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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
Description

Portkey.ai Gateway is a blazing fast AI Gateway with integrated guardrails. Prior to 1.14.0, the gateway determined the destination baseURL by prioritizing the value in the x-portkey-custom-host request header. The proxy route then appends the client-specified path to perform an external fetch. This can be maliciously used by users for SSRF attacks. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.14.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/SA:N/E:X/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