Comparison Overview

Landmark Park Dothan

VS

Brooklands Museum

Landmark Park Dothan

430 Landmark Dr., Dothan, AL, 36303, US
Last Update: 2026-01-18

There’s an adventure waiting for you and your family, just on the outskirts of Dothan, at Landmark Park. A 135-acre park built to preserve the natural and cultural heritage of southeast Alabama’s Wiregrass Region. Landmark Park is more than just a place to look. It is a place to participate and experience. Experience history on an 1890’s living history farm, complete with an old farmhouse, smokehouse, cane mill, syrup shed, and sheep, mules, cows, chickens, goats and pigs. Drift back in time in a Victorian gazebo, a one-room schoolhouse, a drugstore and soda fountain, a country store or a turn-of-the-century church. Experience nature with a walk through the woods on an elevated boardwalk, stroll nature trails, visit our interpretive center and planetarium, see wildlife exhibits and have a picnic in our picnic area. Experience the excitement of annual special events like folklife festivals, antique car shows, traveling exhibits, concerts and workshops. Experience the heritage of the Wiregrass Region and experience an adventure!

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 7
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Brooklands Museum

Brooklands Road, Weybridge, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-12

Our mission is ‘to preserve and interpret the heritage of Brooklands, to use that heritage to inspire and educate and to provide a world-class visitor attraction accessible to all.’ In 2011, we adopted the following vision that explains how the Museum wishes to fulfil this mission and make a difference to its community in the next 10 to 15 years: ‘Through inventiveness, expertise and above all, a sense of adventure, Brooklands changed the world. Building on that amazing legacy, we will use those qualities to inspire future generations to shape their world.’ The vision was derived from an examination of Brooklands’ intangible heritage – ‘the Spirit of Brooklands’ - and considering what it would mean to share that spirit with future generations. Our aim is for Brooklands to be ‘best in class’ and an internationally recognised ‘living museum’. By that we mean that the Museum will be a place of activity: we will demonstrate our aircraft and cars by running engines and provide rides on Test Hill and the Banking; we will continue to develop our learning and family activities for all ages, with volunteers who will interact with visitors to ensure that they get the most out of their visits. Our site will be dynamic with constantly developing exhibitions and displays and we will not be afraid to try new things. Brooklands is built on real stories of people with a passion for breaking the mould, their genius and invention, celebrated on the actual tarmac and in the very buildings ‘where it actually happened’. The Museum will continue to be at the forefront of preserving the heritage of Brooklands, both on its own site but also taking a lead and influencing the landowners and stakeholders in the wider Brooklands area. We will strive to be educationally excellent, which we will achieve by instilling traditional museum values of scholarship and research into modern interpretation and continuing to develop our successful schools and college programme.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 106
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/landmarkparkdothan.jpeg
Landmark Park Dothan
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/brooklands-museum.jpeg
Brooklands 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
Compliance Summary
Landmark Park Dothan
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Brooklands Museum
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 Landmark Park Dothan in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Brooklands Museum in 2026.

Incident History — Landmark Park Dothan (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Landmark Park Dothan cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Brooklands Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/landmarkparkdothan.jpeg
Landmark Park Dothan
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/brooklands-museum.jpeg
Brooklands Museum
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Landmark Park Dothan company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Brooklands Museum company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Brooklands Museum company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Landmark Park Dothan company.

In the current year, Brooklands Museum company and Landmark Park Dothan company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Brooklands Museum company nor Landmark Park Dothan company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Brooklands Museum company nor Landmark Park Dothan company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Brooklands Museum company nor Landmark Park Dothan company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan company nor Brooklands Museum company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan nor Brooklands Museum holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan company nor Brooklands Museum company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Brooklands Museum company employs more people globally than Landmark Park Dothan company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan nor Brooklands Museum holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan nor Brooklands Museum holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan nor Brooklands Museum holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan nor Brooklands Museum holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan nor Brooklands Museum holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Landmark Park Dothan nor Brooklands Museum holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N