Comparison Overview

Henry Sheldon Museum

VS

Museum of Wisconsin Art

Henry Sheldon Museum

1 Park St, Middlebury, Vermont 05753-1101, US
Last Update: 2026-01-23

The Sheldon Museum, the oldest community-based Museum in the country, has welcomed visitors and researchers since 1884. The elegant Federal house, located in the heart of downtown Middlebury, was built in 1829 by marble merchants Eben Judd and Lebbeus Harris. Local businessman and tireless collector Henry Sheldon later filled it with fine Vermont furniture, paintings, documents, household objects, and artifacts that provide a glimpse into Addison County and Vermont’s past. The permanent collection continues to grow today, making the Sheldon Museum a cultural heart of the region.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 3
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Museum of Wisconsin Art

205 Veterans Avenue, West Bend, WI, 53095, US
Last Update: 2026-01-23
Between 750 and 799

The Museum of Wisconsin Art (MOWA) explores the art and culture of Wisconsin. Founded in 1961, MOWA is one of the top museums of regional art in the United States, with almost 5,000 works of contemporary and historic art by more than 350 artists. Through rotating exhibitions and educational programs, MOWA provides an innovative forum for the culturally engaged. In 2013, MOWA opened its new 32,000-square-foot facility in downtown West Bend. The building, the first museum commission by acclaimed architect Jim Shields of HGA Architects, is situated along the west bend of the Milwaukee River on a triangular plot of land that inspired the facility’s modern wedge shape. An expansive wall of windows follows the curve of the river bank and minimizes the boundaries between interior and exterior. The museum houses five permanent collection galleries, three temporary exhibition spaces, and two classrooms as well as visible art storage, a shop, and a large atrium for public events.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 29
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/henry-sheldon-museum-vermont.jpeg
Henry Sheldon 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/museum-of-wisconsin-art.jpeg
Museum of Wisconsin 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
Henry Sheldon Museum
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Museum of Wisconsin 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 Henry Sheldon Museum in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Museum of Wisconsin Art in 2026.

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

Henry Sheldon Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

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

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/henry-sheldon-museum-vermont.jpeg
Henry Sheldon Museum
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/museum-of-wisconsin-art.jpeg
Museum of Wisconsin Art
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Henry Sheldon Museum company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Museum of Wisconsin Art company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Museum of Wisconsin Art company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Henry Sheldon Museum company.

In the current year, Museum of Wisconsin Art company and Henry Sheldon Museum company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Museum of Wisconsin Art company nor Henry Sheldon Museum company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Museum of Wisconsin Art company nor Henry Sheldon Museum company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Museum of Wisconsin Art company nor Henry Sheldon Museum company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum company nor Museum of Wisconsin Art company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum nor Museum of Wisconsin Art holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum company nor Museum of Wisconsin Art company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Museum of Wisconsin Art company employs more people globally than Henry Sheldon Museum company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum nor Museum of Wisconsin Art holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum nor Museum of Wisconsin Art holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum nor Museum of Wisconsin Art holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum nor Museum of Wisconsin Art holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum nor Museum of Wisconsin Art holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Henry Sheldon Museum nor Museum of Wisconsin Art 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.

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
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

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
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

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
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.

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
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.

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