Comparison Overview

King's College London

VS

Imperial College London

King's College London

Strand, London, greater london, WC2R 2LS, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

King’s College London is amongst the top 40 universities in the world and top 10 in Europe (THE World University Rankings 2024), and one of England’s oldest and most prestigious universities. With an outstanding reputation for world-class teaching and cutting-edge research, King’s maintained its sixth position for ‘research power’ in the UK (2021 Research Excellence Framework). King's has more than 33,000 students (including more than 12,800 postgraduates) from some 150 countries worldwide, and 8,500 staff. For nearly 200 years, King’s students and staff have used their knowledge and insight to make a positive impact on people, society and the planet. Focused on delivering positive change at home in London, across the UK and around the world, King’s is building on its history of addressing the world’s most urgent challenges head on to accelerate progress, make discoveries and pioneer innovation. Visit the website to find out more about Vision 2029, which sets out bold ambitions for the future of King’s as we look towards our 200th anniversary. World-changing ideas. Life-changing impact: kcl.ac.uk/news

NAICS: 5417
NAICS Definition: Scientific Research and Development Services
Employees: 18,644
Subsidiaries: 18
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Imperial College London

South Kensington Campus, London, GB, SW7 2AZ
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Consistently rated in the top 10 universities in the world, Imperial College London is the only university in the UK to focus exclusively on science, medicine, engineering and business. At Imperial we bring together people, disciplines, industries and sectors to further our understanding of the natural world, solve major engineering problems, lead the data revolution and improve health and well-being.

NAICS: 5417
NAICS Definition: Scientific Research and Development Services
Employees: 16,893
Subsidiaries: 29
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/king's-college-london.jpeg
King's College London
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/imperial-college-london.jpeg
Imperial College London
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
King's College London
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Imperial College London
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Research Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for King's College London in 2025.

Incidents vs Research Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Imperial College London in 2025.

Incident History — King's College London (X = Date, Y = Severity)

King's College London cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Imperial College London (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Imperial College London cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/king's-college-london.jpeg
King's College London
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/imperial-college-london.jpeg
Imperial College London
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

King's College London company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Imperial College London company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Imperial College London company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to King's College London company.

In the current year, Imperial College London company and King's College London company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Imperial College London company nor King's College London company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Imperial College London company nor King's College London company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Imperial College London company nor King's College London company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither King's College London company nor Imperial College London company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither King's College London nor Imperial College London holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Imperial College London company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to King's College London company.

King's College London company employs more people globally than Imperial College London company, reflecting its scale as a Research Services.

Neither King's College London nor Imperial College London holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither King's College London nor Imperial College London holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither King's College London nor Imperial College London holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither King's College London nor Imperial College London holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither King's College London nor Imperial College London holds HIPAA certification.

Neither King's College London nor Imperial College London holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Sigstore Timestamp Authority is a service for issuing RFC 3161 timestamps. Prior to 2.0.3, Function api.ParseJSONRequest currently splits (via a call to strings.Split) an optionally-provided OID (which is untrusted data) on periods. Similarly, function api.getContentType splits the Content-Type header (which is also untrusted data) on an application string. As a result, in the face of a malicious request with either an excessively long OID in the payload containing many period characters or a malformed Content-Type header, a call to api.ParseJSONRequest or api.getContentType incurs allocations of O(n) bytes (where n stands for the length of the function's argument). This vulnerability is fixed in 2.0.3.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Monkeytype is a minimalistic and customizable typing test. In 25.49.0 and earlier, there is improper handling of user input which allows an attacker to execute malicious javascript on anyone viewing a malicious quote submission. quote.text and quote.source are user input, and they're inserted straight into the DOM. If they contain HTML tags, they will be rendered (after some escaping using quotes and textarea tags).

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/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
Description

SysReptor is a fully customizable pentest reporting platform. Prior to 2025.102, there is a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability allows authenticated users to execute malicious JavaScript in the context of other logged-in users by uploading malicious JavaScript files in the web UI. This vulnerability is fixed in 2025.102.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Taiko Alethia is an Ethereum-equivalent, permissionless, based rollup designed to scale Ethereum without compromising its fundamental properties. In 2.3.1 and earlier, TaikoInbox._verifyBatches (packages/protocol/contracts/layer1/based/TaikoInbox.sol:627-678) advanced the local tid to whatever transition matched the current blockHash before knowing whether that batch would actually be verified. When the loop later broke (e.g., cooldown window not yet passed or transition invalidated), the function still wrote that newer tid into batches[lastVerifiedBatchId].verifiedTransitionId after decrementing batchId. Result: the last verified batch could end up pointing at a transition index from the next batch (often zeroed), corrupting the verified chain pointer.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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

A flaw has been found in youlaitech youlai-mall 1.0.0/2.0.0. Affected is the function getById/updateAddress/deleteAddress of the file /mall-ums/app-api/v1/addresses/. Executing manipulation can lead to improper control of dynamically-identified variables. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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