Comparison Overview

Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden

VS

Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco

Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden

1800 Lakeside Avenue, Richmond, VA, 23228, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden’s mission is education and our passion is connecting people and plants to improve communities. Our goal is to extend beyond traditional boundaries to have a positive impact and to enrich lives. The Garden is growing fresh produce for the hungry; actively participating in urban greening and water management initiatives; contributing to economic development and work-force training; and educating diverse youth and adult audiences about critical issues related to the interdependence of plants and people. Our Mission affirms the Garden as a primary resource for learning about the botanical world—its beauty, heritage, and significance to the web of life. Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden connects people through plants to improve communities. Our Vision builds upon our accomplishments and expanded presence and responsibility as we have transformed from a local attraction to a national place of excellence. Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden, including the new Lewis Ginter Nature Reserve, reveals the unity and integration of human and plant life, celebrates the fundamental significance of the natural world, and enriches communities through horticultural and educational excellence and innovative outreach initiatives.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 119
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco

750 Kearny St., 3rd Floor, San Francisco, CA, 94108, US
Last Update: 2025-12-02
Between 750 and 799

Chinese Culture Center, under the aegis of the Chinese Culture Foundation, is dedicated to elevating underserved communities and giving voice to equality through education and contemporary arts programming. We elevate Chinatown and other underserved communities by empowering youth and residents. Founded in 1965 and rooted in Chinatown, the Chinese Culture Center (or CCC) believes in a comprehensive community-building strategy that combines arts and education to create strong neighborhoods. Furthermore, we see Chinatown as a model of creativity and resilience for all underserved communities. We are a community-focused arts nonprofit. Our work is based in Chinatown and San Francisco's open and public spaces, and other art institutions. CCC’s activities include public art, contemporary exhibitions, and education programming. Over 150,000 members of the community engage with CCC annually. CCC is a proud partner of #StartSmall, the prestigious Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, San Francisco Foundation, Wells Fargo Foundation and the National Endowment for the Arts.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 21
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/lewis-ginter-botanical-garden.jpeg
Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden
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/chinese-culture-center-of-san-francisco.jpeg
Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco
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
Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco
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 Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco in 2025.

Incident History — Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lewis-ginter-botanical-garden.jpeg
Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chinese-culture-center-of-san-francisco.jpeg
Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company.

In the current year, Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company and Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company nor Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company nor Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company nor Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden company employs more people globally than Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Lewis Ginter Botanical Garden nor Chinese Culture Center of San Francisco holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). Prior to 0.11.1, vllm has a critical remote code execution vector in a config class named Nemotron_Nano_VL_Config. When vllm loads a model config that contains an auto_map entry, the config class resolves that mapping with get_class_from_dynamic_module(...) and immediately instantiates the returned class. This fetches and executes Python from the remote repository referenced in the auto_map string. Crucially, this happens even when the caller explicitly sets trust_remote_code=False in vllm.transformers_utils.config.get_config. In practice, an attacker can publish a benign-looking frontend repo whose config.json points via auto_map to a separate malicious backend repo; loading the frontend will silently run the backend’s code on the victim host. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.11.1.

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

fastify-reply-from is a Fastify plugin to forward the current HTTP request to another server. Prior to 12.5.0, by crafting a malicious URL, an attacker could access routes that are not allowed, even though the reply.from is defined for specific routes in @fastify/reply-from. This vulnerability is fixed in 12.5.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17, A Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability has been identified in the Angular Template Compiler. It occurs because the compiler's internal security schema is incomplete, allowing attackers to bypass Angular's built-in security sanitization. Specifically, the schema fails to classify certain URL-holding attributes (e.g., those that could contain javascript: URLs) as requiring strict URL security, enabling the injection of malicious scripts. This vulnerability is fixed in 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/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
Description

Gin-vue-admin is a backstage management system based on vue and gin. In 2.8.6 and earlier, attackers can delete any file on the server at will, causing damage or unavailability of server resources. Attackers can control the 'FileMd5' parameter to delete any file and folder.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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

Portkey.ai Gateway is a blazing fast AI Gateway with integrated guardrails. Prior to 1.14.0, the gateway determined the destination baseURL by prioritizing the value in the x-portkey-custom-host request header. The proxy route then appends the client-specified path to perform an external fetch. This can be maliciously used by users for SSRF attacks. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.14.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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