Comparison Overview

Niagara History Center

VS

Augusta Museum Of History

Niagara History Center

215 Niagara St, Lockport, 14094, US
Last Update: 2026-01-23
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://niagarahistory.org/

The Niagara History Center is dedicated to the preservation, promotion, and interpretation of the diverse cultural heritage of the people, places, and events related to Niagara County and the Erie Canal. It spans three properties and seven buildings in historic Lockport: the main campus at 215 Niagara Street, the Col. William Bond/Jesse Hawley House at 143 Ontario Street, and The Erie Canal Discovery Center at 24 Church Street.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 5
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Augusta Museum Of History

560 Reynolds St, Augusta, Georgia 30901-1430, US
Last Update: 2026-01-23
Between 750 and 799
http://www.augustamuseum.org

Founded in 1937, the Augusta Museum of History is Augusta's oldest historical agency devoted to the preservation and presentation of local and regional history. The not-for-profit agency functions as the steward of the community's rich, diverse, and invaluable material past. The museum curates the largest and most significant historical collection in the CSRA and functions as a historical research and resource center for professional and amateur historians, media, organizations, and individuals, and is home to the permanent exhibition Augusta's Story, a 12,000-year journey through the region's past.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 9
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/niagara-history-center.jpeg
Niagara History Center
—
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/augusta-museum-of-history.jpeg
Augusta Museum Of 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
Compliance Summary
Niagara History Center
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Augusta Museum Of History
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 Niagara History Center in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Augusta Museum Of History in 2026.

Incident History — Niagara History Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Niagara History Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Augusta Museum Of History cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/niagara-history-center.jpeg
Niagara History Center
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/augusta-museum-of-history.jpeg
Augusta Museum Of History
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Augusta Museum Of History company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Niagara History Center company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Augusta Museum Of History company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Niagara History Center company.

In the current year, Augusta Museum Of History company and Niagara History Center company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Augusta Museum Of History company nor Niagara History Center company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Augusta Museum Of History company nor Niagara History Center company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Augusta Museum Of History company nor Niagara History Center company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Niagara History Center company nor Augusta Museum Of History company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Niagara History Center nor Augusta Museum Of History holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Niagara History Center company nor Augusta Museum Of History company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Augusta Museum Of History company employs more people globally than Niagara History Center company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Niagara History Center nor Augusta Museum Of History holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Niagara History Center nor Augusta Museum Of History holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Niagara History Center nor Augusta Museum Of History holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Niagara History Center nor Augusta Museum Of History holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Niagara History Center nor Augusta Museum Of History holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Niagara History Center nor Augusta Museum Of History 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.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
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
References
Description

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

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
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
References
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2026-01-22
Updated
Date
2026-01-22
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
References