Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

Hackensack Public SchoolsHackensack Public Schools
VS
Fairfax County Public SchoolsFairfax County Public Schools
Hackensack Public Schools

Hackensack Public Schools

191 2nd St, Hackensack, 07601, US

Last Update: 03/08/2026

View Profile
672/1000Weak

The Hackensack Public Schools are a comprehensive community public school district that serves students in pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade from the City of Hackensack, in Bergen County, New Jersey, United States. As of the 2019-20 school year, the district and i...

NAICS:6111
NAICS Definition:Elementary and Secondary Schools
Employees:181
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Fairfax County Public Schools

Fairfax County Public Schools

8115 Gatehouse Road, Falls Church, 22042, US

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.fcps.edu
699/1000Weak

Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS), located in Northern Virginia, is the nation’s 9th largest public school system, serves a diverse population of more than 180,000 students in grades prekindergarten through 12. Fairfax County high schools are recognized annually by t...

NAICS:6111
NAICS Definition:Elementary and Secondary Schools
Employees:20,304
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Hackensack Public Schools

Hackensack Public Schools

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
Fairfax County Public Schools

Fairfax County Public Schools

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Primary and Secondary Education Industry Avg (This Year)

Hackensack Public Schools has 31.97% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Primary and Secondary Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Fairfax County Public Schools in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Hackensack Public Schools (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hackensack Public Schools cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Fairfax County Public Schools (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fairfax County Public Schools cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Hackensack Public Schools

Hackensack Public Schools

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
HAC1785752611
Fairfax County Public Schools

Fairfax County Public Schools

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
FAI16924623
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
FAI312080525
🔒 Incident : Breach
FAI305072525

FAQ

Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools company and Fairfax County Public Schools company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools and Fairfax County Public Schools, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools and Fairfax County Public Schools, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Hackensack Public Schools or Fairfax County Public Schools ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Hackensack Public Schools or Fairfax County Public Schools ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools and Fairfax County Public Schools, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Hackensack Public Schools and Fairfax County Public Schools, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: 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:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9