Comparison Overview

Golden Hinde Trust

VS

Emily Dickinson Museum

Golden Hinde Trust

Unit 1 & 2 Pickfords Wharf, London, SE1 9DG, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-22
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.goldenhinde.com

Golden Hinde Trust (GHT) is a charitable organisation whose aim is to restore and preserve Golden Hinde II for educational and public use, ensuring its history and legacy remain an important part of British heritage, and to promote the various services the Trust has to offer. Located in historic Bankside, with stunning views of the Thames, we offer a range of programmes for all audiences. As well as public tours and events, GHT also runs an established Educational Programme which attracts schools and community groups from across the UK. GHT caters for all ages and academic abilities, with programmes designed for all ages. GHT was founded in 2009 and has since built up a committed team of staff, volunteers and a board of Trustees.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 1
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Emily Dickinson Museum

None
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 800 and 849
http://EmilyDickinsonMuseum.org

The Emily Dickinson Museum is an international destination devoted to celebrating Dickinson’s life and work by preserving and interpreting her family homestead and by bringing alive her startling poetic voice. The Homestead and The Evergreens are unique in their associations with Dickinson. This is the place where she composed 1,800 of the greatest poems in the English language, poetry that has elevated her to the first rank among poets worldwide. The Museum creates a variety of memorable ways to experience Dickinson’s historical and literary life and to appreciate her legacy. The spaces in the buildings and on the grounds, and the material life they contain, propel our visitors into Dickinson’s social, cultural, and familial world. Her poetry helps them transcend, as she did, the constraints of the physical world. Emily Dickinson deserves excellence in our operations, educational outreach, innovative programming, and stewardship of the buildings, grounds, and collections. And that’s what we strive to do.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 31
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/golden-hinde-trust.jpeg
Golden Hinde Trust
—
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/emily-dickinson-museum.jpeg
Emily Dickinson Museum
—
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
Golden Hinde Trust
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Emily Dickinson Museum
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 Golden Hinde Trust in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Emily Dickinson Museum in 2026.

Incident History — Golden Hinde Trust (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Golden Hinde Trust cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Emily Dickinson Museum (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Emily Dickinson Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/golden-hinde-trust.jpeg
Golden Hinde Trust
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/emily-dickinson-museum.jpeg
Emily Dickinson Museum
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Emily Dickinson Museum company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Golden Hinde Trust company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Emily Dickinson Museum company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Golden Hinde Trust company.

In the current year, Emily Dickinson Museum company and Golden Hinde Trust company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Emily Dickinson Museum company nor Golden Hinde Trust company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Emily Dickinson Museum company nor Golden Hinde Trust company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Emily Dickinson Museum company nor Golden Hinde Trust company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust company nor Emily Dickinson Museum company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust nor Emily Dickinson Museum holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust company nor Emily Dickinson Museum company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Emily Dickinson Museum company employs more people globally than Golden Hinde Trust company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust nor Emily Dickinson Museum holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust nor Emily Dickinson Museum holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust nor Emily Dickinson Museum holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust nor Emily Dickinson Museum holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust nor Emily Dickinson Museum holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Golden Hinde Trust nor Emily Dickinson Museum 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