Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

INTO Newcastle UniversityINTO Newcastle University
VS
The California State UniversityThe California State University
INTO Newcastle University

INTO Newcastle University

The INTO Building, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, GB, NE17RU

Last Update: 20/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.nclisc.com/en
769/1000Fair

INTO was founded in 2005 to help young people around the world study at leading universities. Today, we’ve connected thousands of international students with their dream universities in the UK, US and China, offering high-quality degrees and pathway programmes that are...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:52
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
The California State University

The California State University

401 Golden Shore, Long Beach, CA, US, 90802

Last Update: 07/05/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.calstate.edu/
733/1000Moderate

The  California State University is the largest system of four-year higher education in the country, with 22 campuses, 56,000 faculty and staff and more than 450,000 students. Created in 1960, the mission of the CSU is to provide high-quality, affordable education to m...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:92,037
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
INTO Newcastle University

INTO Newcastle University

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
The California State University

The California State University

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for INTO Newcastle University in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

The California State University has 3.85% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - INTO Newcastle University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

INTO Newcastle University cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - The California State University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The California State University cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
INTO Newcastle University

INTO Newcastle University

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
The California State University

The California State University

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
KERTHECAL1778192774

FAQ

Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between INTO Newcastle University company and The California State University company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between INTO Newcastle University and The California State University, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between INTO Newcastle University and The California State University, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - INTO Newcastle University or The California State University ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - INTO Newcastle University or The California State University ?
Between INTO Newcastle University and The California State University, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between INTO Newcastle University and The California State University, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1