Comparison Overview

Natural History Museum

VS

Museums of Old York

Natural History Museum

Cromwell Road, London, England, SW7 5BD, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-19
Between 750 and 799

The Natural History Museum is a world-class visitor attraction and leading science research centre. We use the Museum's unique collections and our unrivalled expertise to tackle the biggest challenges facing the world today. More than 80 million objects spanning billions of years are in our care. We welcome more than five million visitors to our galleries annually, and 16 million visitors to our websites. Today the Museum is more relevant and influential than ever. By attracting people from a range of backgrounds to work for us, we can continue to look at the world with fresh eyes. http://www.nhm.ac.uk/jobs  Stay up to date with Museum news and events on our website: https://www.nhm.ac.uk/ And on social media: https://facebook.com/naturalhistorymuseum  https://twitter.com/NHM_London https://instagram/natural_history_museum  https://www.tiktok.com/@its_nhm https://youtube.com/naturalhistorymuseum

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 1,656
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Museums of Old York

3 Lindsay Road, York, ME, 03909, US
Last Update: 2026-01-08
Between 750 and 799

The Museums of Old York is the product of a merger of three historical organizations founded in York with histories dating back more than a hundred years. The Mission of the Museums of Old York is to preserve and promote the rich history of the York region through programs and educational experiences that enhance historical perspective and build on community pride. We have 8 different buildings highlighting various aspects of York life, decorative arts, contemporary art, and social history located throughout York Village.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 6
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/natural-history-museum.jpeg
Natural History 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/museums-of-old-york.jpeg
Museums of Old York
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
Natural History Museum
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Museums of Old York
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 Natural History Museum in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Museums of Old York in 2026.

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

Natural History Museum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Museums of Old York (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Museums of Old York cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/natural-history-museum.jpeg
Natural History Museum
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/museums-of-old-york.jpeg
Museums of Old York
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Natural History Museum company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Museums of Old York company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Museums of Old York company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Natural History Museum company.

In the current year, Museums of Old York company and Natural History Museum company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Museums of Old York company nor Natural History Museum company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Museums of Old York company nor Natural History Museum company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Museums of Old York company nor Natural History Museum company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Natural History Museum company nor Museums of Old York company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Natural History Museum nor Museums of Old York holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Natural History Museum company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Museums of Old York company.

Natural History Museum company employs more people globally than Museums of Old York company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Natural History Museum nor Museums of Old York holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Natural History Museum nor Museums of Old York holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Natural History Museum nor Museums of Old York holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Natural History Museum nor Museums of Old York holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Natural History Museum nor Museums of Old York holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Natural History Museum nor Museums of Old York 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