Comparison Overview

Foundation for the WA Museum

VS

Oyster Bay Historical Society

Foundation for the WA Museum

140 William St, Perth, Western Australia, 6000, AU
Last Update: 2025-12-01
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.fwam.com.au

The best structures are built on strong foundations. The Foundation for the WA Museum believes that museums should spark a love of learning in the next generation. They should nurture a fascination with the past, an understanding of the present, and a passion for the future – and inspire us all in unexpected ways. Importantly, they should influence and motivate young people to investigate the areas of science, technology, the arts and mathematics in the world around them. The Foundation for the WA Museum is an independent organisation that has been committed to securing the future of our state heritage since 1995.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 18
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Oyster Bay Historical Society

None
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799
http://www.oysterbayhistorical.org

The Oyster Bay Historical Society maintains the18th-century Earle-Wightman House and garden, as well as the Angela Koenig Research and Exhibition Center. The Society is committed to preserving the history of Oyster Bay and making that history accessible to everyone through its permanent collections, rotating exhibitions, and educational programs.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 6
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/defaultcompany.jpeg
Oyster Bay Historical Society
—
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
Foundation for the WA Museum
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Oyster Bay Historical Society
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 Foundation for the WA Museum in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Oyster Bay Historical Society in 2025.

Incident History — Foundation for the WA Museum (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Foundation for the WA Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Oyster Bay Historical Society (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Oyster Bay Historical Society cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/foundation-for-the-wa-museum.jpeg
Foundation for the WA Museum
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Oyster Bay Historical Society
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Oyster Bay Historical Society company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Foundation for the WA Museum company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Oyster Bay Historical Society company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Foundation for the WA Museum company.

In the current year, Oyster Bay Historical Society company and Foundation for the WA Museum company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Oyster Bay Historical Society company nor Foundation for the WA Museum company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Oyster Bay Historical Society company nor Foundation for the WA Museum company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Oyster Bay Historical Society company nor Foundation for the WA Museum company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum company nor Oyster Bay Historical Society company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum nor Oyster Bay Historical Society holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum company nor Oyster Bay Historical Society company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Foundation for the WA Museum company employs more people globally than Oyster Bay Historical Society company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum nor Oyster Bay Historical Society holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum nor Oyster Bay Historical Society holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum nor Oyster Bay Historical Society holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum nor Oyster Bay Historical Society holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum nor Oyster Bay Historical Society holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Foundation for the WA Museum nor Oyster Bay Historical Society holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to 7.1.2-9 and 6.9.13-34, there is a vulnerability in ImageMagick’s Magick++ layer that manifests when Options::fontFamily is invoked with an empty string. Clearing a font family calls RelinquishMagickMemory on _drawInfo->font, freeing the font string but leaving _drawInfo->font pointing to freed memory while _drawInfo->family is set to that (now-invalid) pointer. Any later cleanup or reuse of _drawInfo->font re-frees or dereferences dangling memory. DestroyDrawInfo and other setters (Options::font, Image::font) assume _drawInfo->font remains valid, so destruction or subsequent updates trigger crashes or heap corruption. This vulnerability is fixed in 7.1.2-9 and 6.9.13-34.

Published
Date
2025-12-02
Updated
Date
2025-12-02
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
References
Description

FeehiCMS version 2.1.1 has a Remote Code Execution via Unrestricted File Upload in Ad Management. FeehiCMS version 2.1.1 allows authenticated remote attackers to upload files that the server later executes (or stores in an executable location) without sufficient validation, sanitization, or execution restrictions. An authenticated remote attacker can upload a crafted PHP file and cause the application or web server to execute it, resulting in remote code execution (RCE).

Published
Date
2025-12-02
Updated
Date
2025-12-02
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
References
Description

PHPGurukul Billing System 1.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the admin/index.php endpoint. Specifically, the username parameter accepts unvalidated user input, which is then concatenated directly into a backend SQL query.

Published
Date
2025-12-02
Updated
Date
2025-12-02
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
References
Description

NMIS/BioDose software V22.02 and previous versions contain executable binaries with plain text hard-coded passwords. These hard-coded passwords could allow unauthorized access to both the application and database.

Published
Date
2025-12-02
Updated
Date
2025-12-02
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
cvss4
Base: 8.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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
References
Description

NMIS/BioDose V22.02 and previous versions' installation directory paths by default have insecure file permissions, which in certain deployment scenarios can enable users on client workstations to modify the program executables and libraries.

Published
Date
2025-12-02
Updated
Date
2025-12-02
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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
References