Comparison Overview

Los Alamos National Laboratory

VS

Chinese Academy of Sciences

Los Alamos National Laboratory

P.O. Box 1663, Los Alamos, NM, 87545, US
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 750 and 799

Los Alamos National Laboratory is one of the world’s most innovative multidisciplinary research institutions. We're engaged in strategic science on behalf of national security to ensure the safety and reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile. Our workforce specializes in a wide range of progressive science, technology and engineering across many exciting fields, including space exploration, geophysics, renewable energy, supercomputing, medicine and nanotechnology.

NAICS: 5417
NAICS Definition: Scientific Research and Development Services
Employees: 12,714
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Chinese Academy of Sciences

52 Sanlihe Rd., Beijing, CN, 100864
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) is the lead national scientific institution in natural sciences and high technology development in China and the country's supreme scientific advisory body. It incorporates three major parts: a comprehensive research and development network consisting of 104 research institutes, a traditional merit-based national academy as represented by its Academic Divisions and a system of higher education based on its affiliated 3 universities and the support of its research institutes. CAS has served as the major national strategic research force since founding in November 1949 and has left its deep footprints in Chinese S&T and the overall development of China's national innovation system.

NAICS: 5417
NAICS Definition: Scientific Research and Development Services
Employees: 14,820
Subsidiaries: 16
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/los-alamos-national-laboratory.jpeg
Los Alamos National Laboratory
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-academy-of-sciences.jpeg
Chinese Academy of Sciences
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
Los Alamos National Laboratory
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Chinese Academy of Sciences
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Research Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Los Alamos National Laboratory in 2025.

Incidents vs Research Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2025.

Incident History — Los Alamos National Laboratory (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Los Alamos National Laboratory cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Chinese Academy of Sciences (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chinese Academy of Sciences cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/los-alamos-national-laboratory.jpeg
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chinese-academy-of-sciences.jpeg
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Los Alamos National Laboratory company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Chinese Academy of Sciences company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Chinese Academy of Sciences company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Los Alamos National Laboratory company.

In the current year, Chinese Academy of Sciences company and Los Alamos National Laboratory company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Chinese Academy of Sciences company nor Los Alamos National Laboratory company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Chinese Academy of Sciences company nor Los Alamos National Laboratory company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Chinese Academy of Sciences company nor Los Alamos National Laboratory company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory company nor Chinese Academy of Sciences company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory nor Chinese Academy of Sciences holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Chinese Academy of Sciences company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Los Alamos National Laboratory company.

Chinese Academy of Sciences company employs more people globally than Los Alamos National Laboratory company, reflecting its scale as a Research Services.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory nor Chinese Academy of Sciences holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory nor Chinese Academy of Sciences holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory nor Chinese Academy of Sciences holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory nor Chinese Academy of Sciences holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory nor Chinese Academy of Sciences holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Los Alamos National Laboratory nor Chinese Academy of Sciences holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

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