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

Comparison Overview

Instituto Federal de SergipeInstituto Federal de Sergipe
VS
Tecnológico de MonterreyTecnológico de Monterrey
Instituto Federal de Sergipe

Instituto Federal de Sergipe

Aracaju, 49.055-260, BR

Last Update: 09/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.ifs.edu.br/
715/1000Moderate

O Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia de Sergipe é uma instituição de ensino vinculada ao Ministério da Educação - MEC. Atualmente, conta com 10 campi: Aracaju, Estância, Glória, Itabaiana, Lagarto, Poço Redondo, Propriá, São Cristóvão, Socorro e Tobias ...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:393
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Tecnológico de Monterrey

Tecnológico de Monterrey

Ave. Eugenio Garza Sada 2501 Sur, Colonia Tecnológico, Monterrey, nuevo león, MX, 64849

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://tec.mx
817/1000Good

The Tecnológico de Monterrey is a private university system with 33 campuses in 26 cities in Mexico, which serves more than 96,000 students in its high school, undergraduate and graduate programs. It also has liaison offices in 12 countries. Through the promotion of ...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:28,161
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Instituto Federal de Sergipe

Instituto Federal de Sergipe

-
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
Tecnológico de Monterrey

Tecnológico de Monterrey

-
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 Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Instituto Federal de Sergipe in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tecnológico de Monterrey in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Instituto Federal de Sergipe (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Instituto Federal de Sergipe cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Tecnológico de Monterrey (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tecnológico de Monterrey cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Instituto Federal de Sergipe

Instituto Federal de Sergipe

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
INS1772102271
Tecnológico de Monterrey

Tecnológico de Monterrey

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67595
SUMMARY

VaahCMS versions 2.0.0 through 2.3.4 contain a malicious obfuscated JavaScript payload embedded in the Blade template responsible for rendering security OTP emails, allowing remote attackers to execute unauthorized code in any browser that renders the affected email template with JavaScript enabled. The payload establishes a WebSocket connection to a hardcoded command-and-control endpoint, installs a password-field keylogger using MutationObserver to capture dynamically added inputs, scrapes WhatsApp Web DOM content, and accepts remote commands to redirect or overwrite the rendered page.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-15157
SUMMARY

undici does not validate the type property of a duck-typed blob-like request body before using it as the Content-Type header on the HTTP/1.1 dispatcher. In undici before 6.28.0, from 7.0.0 up to before 7.29.0, and from 8.0.0 up to before 8.9.0, an application that passes a hand-rolled blob-like body (via request, stream, pipeline, or dispatch) whose type is derived from untrusted input allows an attacker to inject CRLF sequences and append arbitrary HTTP headers, potentially smuggling a second request past the upstream. Native Blob objects are safe because their constructor strips CRLF from the type, and fetch is unaffected because it validates headers, but ecosystem libraries that build duck-typed blob shapes from user input can reach the vulnerable path. This is the same defect class as CVE-2022-35948 and CVE-2026-1527, on a header sink that the earlier fixes did not cover. The issue is fixed in undici 6.28.0, 7.29.0, and 8.9.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-14643
SUMMARY

undici's cache interceptor mishandles optional whitespace placed around the equals sign of a qualified no-cache or private Cache-Control directive. In undici from 7.0.0 up to before 7.29.0 and from 8.0.0 up to before 8.9.0, the parser either drops the directive or stores a field name with literal quote characters, so the cache decision fails to recognize the qualification and the response is stored. In shared-cache mode, this lets a response containing one user's authenticated data be served from cache to a later caller, including an unauthenticated one, when both requests resolve to the same cache key. It affects applications that enable the cache interceptor in shared mode, forward Authorization headers upstream, and receive cacheable responses with qualified directives padded with whitespace around the equals sign. This is the whitespace-around-equals variant that the fix for CVE-2026-9678 did not normalize, and it is fixed in undici 7.29.0 and 8.9.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2025-69945
SUMMARY

kishan0725 Hospital Management System 4.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in /doctor/edit-patient.php?editid=1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-29
UPDATED
Date2026-07-29
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA