Comparison Overview

National Portrait Gallery

VS

Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc.

National Portrait Gallery

St Martin's Place, London, WC2H 0HE, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-23
Between 750 and 799

Founded in 1856, the National Portrait Gallery tells the story of Britain through portraits, using art to bring history to life and explore living today. From global icons, to unsung heroes, our Collection is filled with the stories that have shaped, and continue to shape a nation. We celebrate the power of portraiture and offer encounters with some of the world’s greatest and most exciting new artists, promoting engagement with portraiture in all media to a wide-ranging public by conserving, growing and sharing the world’s largest collection of portraits. The Gallery aims to be the foremost centre for the study of and research into portraiture, as well as making its work and activities of interest and accessible to as wide a range of visitors as possible. For current job opportunities, please visit www.npg.org.uk/jobs

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 453
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc.

PO BOX 1086, Melbourne, 32902, US
Last Update: 2026-01-04
Between 750 and 799

Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. is a Florida not-for-profit corporation formed for the general purpose of promoting historic preservation in South Brevard County, Florida. The corporation takes its name from the most significant building left to preserve (or rehab for contemporary use), Green Gables, the Queen Anne "cottage" built by industrialist William T. Wells in 1896.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 4
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/defaultcompany.jpeg
Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc.
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
National Portrait Gallery
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc.
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 National Portrait Gallery in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. in 2026.

Incident History — National Portrait Gallery (X = Date, Y = Severity)

National Portrait Gallery cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/national-portrait-gallery.jpeg
National Portrait Gallery
Incidents
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

National Portrait Gallery company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to National Portrait Gallery company.

In the current year, Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company and National Portrait Gallery company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company nor National Portrait Gallery company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company nor National Portrait Gallery company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company nor National Portrait Gallery company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither National Portrait Gallery company nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither National Portrait Gallery nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither National Portrait Gallery company nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

National Portrait Gallery company employs more people globally than Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither National Portrait Gallery nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither National Portrait Gallery nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither National Portrait Gallery nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither National Portrait Gallery nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither National Portrait Gallery nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. holds HIPAA certification.

Neither National Portrait Gallery nor Green Gables at Historic Riverview Village, Inc. holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper validation of specified type of input in M365 Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
Description

Moonraker is a Python web server providing API access to Klipper 3D printing firmware. In versions 0.9.3 and below, instances configured with the "ldap" component enabled are vulnerable to LDAP search filter injection techniques via the login endpoint. The 401 error response message can be used to determine whether or not a search was successful, allowing for brute force methods to discover LDAP entries on the server such as user IDs and user attributes. This issue has been fixed in version 0.10.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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

Runtipi is a Docker-based, personal homeserver orchestrator that facilitates multiple services on a single server. Versions 3.7.0 and above allow an authenticated user to execute arbitrary system commands on the host server by injecting shell metacharacters into backup filenames. The BackupManager fails to sanitize the filenames of uploaded backups. The system persists user-uploaded files directly to the host filesystem using the raw originalname provided in the request. This allows an attacker to stage a file containing shell metacharacters (e.g., $(id).tar.gz) at a predictable path, which is later referenced during the restore process. The successful storage of the file is what allows the subsequent restore command to reference and execute it. This issue has been fixed in version 4.7.0.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H