Comparison Overview

NC League of Conservation Voters

VS

Policy@Manchester

NC League of Conservation Voters

127 W. Hargett Street, Suite 403, Raleigh, North Carolina, US, 27601
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

The North Carolina League of Conservation Voters (NCLCV) is a pragmatic, results-oriented, non-partisan organization whose mission is to protect the health and quality of life for all North Carolinians. We elect environmental champions, advocate for environmental policies that protect our communities, and hold elected leaders accountable for their decisions. We create a political environment that will protect our natural environment.

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition: Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support
Employees: 9
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Policy@Manchester

University of Mancheter, Manchester, M13 9PL, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-21

The University of Manchester's policy engagement unit, Policy@Manchester connects researchers with policymakers and influencers, nurtures long-term policy engagement relationships, and seeks to enhance stakeholder understanding of pressing policy challenges. We aim to impact lives globally, nationally and locally through influencing and challenging policymakers with robust research-informed evidence and ideas. The opinions and views expressed are those of the respective content contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of The University of Manchester. Policy recommendations are based on authors’ research evidence and experience in their fields.

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition: Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support
Employees: 5
Subsidiaries: 21
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nclcv.jpeg
NC League of Conservation Voters
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/policy-at-manchester.jpeg
Policy@Manchester
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
NC League of Conservation Voters
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Policy@Manchester
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for NC League of Conservation Voters in 2025.

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Policy@Manchester in 2025.

Incident History — NC League of Conservation Voters (X = Date, Y = Severity)

NC League of Conservation Voters cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Policy@Manchester (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Policy@Manchester cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nclcv.jpeg
NC League of Conservation Voters
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/policy-at-manchester.jpeg
Policy@Manchester
Incidents

Date Detected: 06/2023
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 09/2020
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Both NC League of Conservation Voters company and Policy@Manchester company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Policy@Manchester company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas NC League of Conservation Voters company has not reported any.

In the current year, Policy@Manchester company and NC League of Conservation Voters company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Policy@Manchester company nor NC League of Conservation Voters company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Policy@Manchester company nor NC League of Conservation Voters company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Policy@Manchester company nor NC League of Conservation Voters company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither NC League of Conservation Voters company nor Policy@Manchester company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither NC League of Conservation Voters nor Policy@Manchester holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Policy@Manchester company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to NC League of Conservation Voters company.

NC League of Conservation Voters company employs more people globally than Policy@Manchester company, reflecting its scale as a Public Policy Offices.

Neither NC League of Conservation Voters nor Policy@Manchester holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither NC League of Conservation Voters nor Policy@Manchester holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither NC League of Conservation Voters nor Policy@Manchester holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither NC League of Conservation Voters nor Policy@Manchester holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither NC League of Conservation Voters nor Policy@Manchester holds HIPAA certification.

Neither NC League of Conservation Voters nor Policy@Manchester 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