Comparison Overview

Gotlands Museum

VS

Taylor Studios, Inc.

Gotlands Museum

Strandgatan 14, Visby, 621 56, SE
Last Update: 2026-01-17

Gotlands Museum is a county museum (founded 1875) that makes Gotland's art, history and natural and cultural heritage available to Gotland and visitors from all over the world. The museum consists of Fornsalen, Gotland Art Museum, Visby ruins and the museum manors Norrbys, Kattlunds and Petes. The museum also has a public archive and library, Svahnströmska rummet, collections in Magasin Visborg and a cultural environment department for archeology and building conservation. Fornsalen's Book Publishing Office publishes literature within the museum's various subject areas, always with a connection to Gotland.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 73
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Taylor Studios, Inc.

1320 Harmon Drive, Rantoul, IL, 61866, US
Last Update: 2026-01-08
Between 750 and 799

Museums and nature centers hire Taylor Studios to tell their stories in an engaging way. Through the process of interpretive planning, design, and fabrication, these stories become tangible exhibits that spark visitors’ imaginations. Clients choose to work with Taylor Studios because TSI offers a balance of creativity and business acumen that is essential to making any exhibit project successful. How do we know when a project is successful? Because during every kickoff meeting, we set measurable goals and objectives with the client and ask “What does success look like to you?” Throughout each project, we refer to these standards to ensure the design supports the desired outcomes. Everything we produce is also backed by an unprecedented five-year warranty. Not only does Taylor Studios guide clients through the design-build process, but also we are there for them should a need arise well after the final walk-through.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 27
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/gotlands-museum.jpeg
Gotlands 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/taylor-studios-inc-.jpeg
Taylor Studios, Inc.
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
Gotlands Museum
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Taylor Studios, Inc.
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 Gotlands Museum in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Taylor Studios, Inc. in 2026.

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

Gotlands Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Taylor Studios, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Taylor Studios, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gotlands-museum.jpeg
Gotlands Museum
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/taylor-studios-inc-.jpeg
Taylor Studios, Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Gotlands Museum company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Taylor Studios, Inc. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Taylor Studios, Inc. company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Gotlands Museum company.

In the current year, Taylor Studios, Inc. company and Gotlands Museum company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Taylor Studios, Inc. company nor Gotlands Museum company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Taylor Studios, Inc. company nor Gotlands Museum company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Taylor Studios, Inc. company nor Gotlands Museum company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Gotlands Museum company nor Taylor Studios, Inc. company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Gotlands Museum nor Taylor Studios, Inc. holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Gotlands Museum company nor Taylor Studios, Inc. company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Gotlands Museum company employs more people globally than Taylor Studios, Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Gotlands Museum nor Taylor Studios, Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Gotlands Museum nor Taylor Studios, Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Gotlands Museum nor Taylor Studios, Inc. holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Gotlands Museum nor Taylor Studios, Inc. holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Gotlands Museum nor Taylor Studios, Inc. holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Gotlands Museum nor Taylor Studios, Inc. holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

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

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N