Comparison Overview

Museum of African American History

VS

Battleship Missouri Memorial

Museum of African American History

31 Milk St., Boston, Massachusetts, 02109, US
Last Update: 2026-01-23
Between 750 and 799

Founded in 1967, the principal mission of the Museum of African American History is to preserve, conserve and interpret the contributions of people of African descent and those who have found common cause with them in the struggle for liberty, dignity, and justice for all Americans. Therefore the Museum: - Collects and exhibits artifacts of distinction and acquires and maintains physical structures and sites dating through the end of the 19th century; - Educates the public about the importance of the African American historical legacy in general, and its Boston and New England heritages in particular; - Celebrates the enduring vitality of African American culture; and - Advances on our own and in collaboration with others an appreciation of the lessons of the past to benefit the custodians of the future.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 38
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Battleship Missouri Memorial

63 Cowpens Street, Honolulu, 96818, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

ABOUT US The USS Missouri Memorial Association, Inc. (the Association) is a non-profit 501(c)3 corporation established in the State of Hawaii in 1994. The two key purposes of the Association were initially: To relocate the USS Missouri (BB-63) to Hawaii to establish, operate and maintain a national memorial commemorating the end of hostilities in World War II to serve as a lasting tribute to the United States Navy’s role in forging world peace through strength. To operate exclusively for charitable, scientific, literary, religious, or educational purposes, within the meaning of Section 501 (c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. On May 4th 1998, ownership of the USS Missouri was transferred from the US Navy to the Association through donation contract #N00024-98-C-0201. The ship was towed from Bremerton Washington to Hawaii, arriving June 21st 1998. The ship was opened to the public on January 29th 1999 after six months of repair and restoration. The Association receives no funding from either the U.S. Navy or any other governmental agency for the operations or ongoing maintenance of the ship. Department of Defense grants assisted us in funding the drydock in 2009. Our Mission: The USS Missouri Memorial Association is dedicated to preserving the Battleship Missouri and sharing her story and place in history.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 42
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/museum-of-african-american-history.jpeg
Museum of African American History
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/battleship-missouri-memorial.jpeg
Battleship Missouri Memorial
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
Museum of African American History
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Battleship Missouri Memorial
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 Museum of African American History in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Battleship Missouri Memorial in 2026.

Incident History — Museum of African American History (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Museum of African American History cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Battleship Missouri Memorial (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Battleship Missouri Memorial cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/museum-of-african-american-history.jpeg
Museum of African American History
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/battleship-missouri-memorial.jpeg
Battleship Missouri Memorial
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Museum of African American History company and Battleship Missouri Memorial company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Battleship Missouri Memorial company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Museum of African American History company.

In the current year, Battleship Missouri Memorial company and Museum of African American History company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Battleship Missouri Memorial company nor Museum of African American History company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Battleship Missouri Memorial company nor Museum of African American History company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Battleship Missouri Memorial company nor Museum of African American History company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Museum of African American History company nor Battleship Missouri Memorial company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Museum of African American History nor Battleship Missouri Memorial holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Museum of African American History company nor Battleship Missouri Memorial company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Battleship Missouri Memorial company employs more people globally than Museum of African American History company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Museum of African American History nor Battleship Missouri Memorial holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Museum of African American History nor Battleship Missouri Memorial holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Museum of African American History nor Battleship Missouri Memorial holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Museum of African American History nor Battleship Missouri Memorial holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Museum of African American History nor Battleship Missouri Memorial holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Museum of African American History nor Battleship Missouri Memorial 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