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

Comparison Overview

Johns Hopkins Biomedical EngineeringJohns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering
VS
Virginia TechVirginia Tech
Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering

Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering

undefined, Baltimore, MD, 21218, US

Last Update: 05/12/2025

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.bme.jhu.edu/
770/1000Fair

Established in 1961, the Johns Hopkins Department of Biomedical Engineering (BME) is home to the nation’s first training program in the field. Consistently ranked the #1 BME department in the country, our mission is to advance human health by training biomedical enginee...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:77
Subsidiaries:21
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech

800 Drillfield Drive, Blacksburg, 24061, US

Last Update: 08/05/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.vt.edu
770/1000Fair

Dedicated to its motto, Ut Prosim (That I May Serve), Virginia Tech takes a hands-on, engaging approach to education, preparing scholars to be leaders in their fields and communities. As the commonwealth’s most comprehensive university and its leading research instituti...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:15,651
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering

Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering

-
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
Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech

-
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 Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

Virginia Tech has 8.26% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Virginia Tech (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Virginia Tech 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...
Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering

Johns Hopkins Biomedical Engineering

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
CANVIR1778280319

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-44654
SUMMARY

LibreChat is an enhanced ChatGPT clone that supports multiple AI providers. In versions up to and including 0.8.3, a shared-agent editor can delete file records through `DELETE /api/files` that the owner has reused across multiple agents. The deletion removes the file globally — not just from the shared agent — breaking the owner's other private agents that reference the same `file_id`. The private agent retains a stale `file_id` reference that no longer resolves. A shared-agent editor can destroy files that the owner uses across multiple agents. The owner's private agents — which the attacker has no access to — break silently with stale `file_id` references. This is a cross-agent integrity violation: editing access to one agent should not affect another. Version 0.8.4 contains a patch.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/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-2026-44653
SUMMARY

LibreChat is an enhanced ChatGPT clone that supports multiple AI providers. In versions up to and including 0.8.3, users with only `VIEW` access to an MCP server can retrieve the server's decrypted admin-managed secrets through `GET /api/mcp/servers` and `GET /api/mcp/servers/:serverName`. The returned config includes plaintext values for `apiKey.key` and `oauth.client_secret`. This allows viewers of a shared MCP server to exfiltrate the underlying provider credentials. Version 0.8..4 contains a patch. Other remediations include: never returning decrypted admin-managed secrets to non-owners; redacting apiKey.key and oauth.client_secret from all API responses consider returning only boolean presence indicators for secrets, similar to the auth-values route pattern; and, if owners need to edit configs without re-entering secrets, preserving secrets server-side and returning placeholders instead of plaintext.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-42507
SUMMARY

When returning errors, functions in the net/textproto package would include its input as part of the error. This might allow an attacker to inject misleading content to errors that are printed or logged.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-42504
SUMMARY

Decoding a maliciously-crafted MIME header containing many invalid encoded-words can consume excessive CPU.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-41412
SUMMARY

alf.io is an open source ticket reservation system for conferences, trade shows, workshops, and meetups. Prior to version 2.0-M5-2606, the alf.io extension sandbox injects a fully-functional HTTP client (`simpleHttpClient`) into every extension script's scope. The `postFileAndSaveResponse()` method accepts an arbitrary filesystem path as its `file` parameter and reads the file contents using `new FileInputStream(file)` with no path validation, directory restriction, or allowlist. A malicious extension script can read any file accessible to the JVM process user and exfiltrate it to an attacker-controlled server via HTTP POST. Version 2.0-M5-2606 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-06-02
UPDATED
Date2026-06-02
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.2