Comparison Overview

The Alamo

VS

Tucson Museum Of Art

The Alamo

300 Alamo Plaza, San Antonio, Texas, US, 78209
Last Update: 2026-01-19
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.thealamo.org

Located in the heart of San Antonio, the Alamo stands as the Shrine of Texas Liberty. More than 1.6 million visitors travel to the site each year, making it the #1 most visited destination in the State of Texas. The 300-year history of the Alamo is world-renowned and represents the core of Texas’ identity today. In 1960, the Alamo was designated a United States National Historic Landmark, and in 2015, it became part of the Lone Star State's only UNESCO World Heritage Site. Witness living history, experience authentic artifacts, and explore an iconic landmark that shaped the country. Visit theAlamo.org.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 118
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Tucson Museum Of Art

140 N Main Ave, Tucson, Arizona 85701-8290, US
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 750 and 799
http://www.TucsonMuseumofArt.org

The Tucson Museum of Art and Historic Block encompasses an entire city block in historic downtown, and features original and traveling exhibitions focusing on Art of Latin America, Art of the American West, Modern and Contemporary Art and Asian Art as well as tours, education programs, studio art classes, and a Museum Store aimed at delighting and educating visitors. The Tucson Museum of Art serves the city and surrounding regions and is committed to broadening public access to the arts and enriching daily life.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 45
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/officialalamo.jpeg
The Alamo
—
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/tucson-museum-of-art.jpeg
Tucson Museum Of Art
—
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
The Alamo
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Tucson Museum Of Art
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 The Alamo in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Tucson Museum Of Art in 2026.

Incident History — The Alamo (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Alamo cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Tucson Museum Of Art cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/officialalamo.jpeg
The Alamo
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tucson-museum-of-art.jpeg
Tucson Museum Of Art
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both The Alamo company and Tucson Museum Of Art company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Tucson Museum Of Art company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to The Alamo company.

In the current year, Tucson Museum Of Art company and The Alamo company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Tucson Museum Of Art company nor The Alamo company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Tucson Museum Of Art company nor The Alamo company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Tucson Museum Of Art company nor The Alamo company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither The Alamo company nor Tucson Museum Of Art company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither The Alamo nor Tucson Museum Of Art holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither The Alamo company nor Tucson Museum Of Art company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

The Alamo company employs more people globally than Tucson Museum Of Art company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither The Alamo nor Tucson Museum Of Art holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither The Alamo nor Tucson Museum Of Art holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither The Alamo nor Tucson Museum Of Art holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither The Alamo nor Tucson Museum Of Art holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither The Alamo nor Tucson Museum Of Art holds HIPAA certification.

Neither The Alamo nor Tucson Museum Of Art holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Typemill is a flat-file, Markdown-based CMS designed for informational documentation websites. A reflected Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) exists in the login error view template `login.twig` of versions 2.19.1 and below. The `username` value can be echoed back without proper contextual encoding when authentication fails. An attacker can execute script in the login page context. This issue has been fixed in version 2.19.2.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
References
Description

A DOM-based Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists in the DomainCheckerApp class within domain/script.js of Sourcecodester Domain Availability Checker v1.0. The vulnerability occurs because the application improperly handles user-supplied data in the createResultElement method by using the unsafe innerHTML property to render domain search results.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
References
Description

A Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability exists in Sourcecodester Modern Image Gallery App v1.0 within the gallery/upload.php component. The application fails to properly validate uploaded file contents. Additionally, the application preserves the user-supplied file extension during the save process. This allows an unauthenticated attacker to upload arbitrary PHP code by spoofing the MIME type as an image, leading to full system compromise.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
References
Description

A UNIX symbolic link following issue in the jailer component in Firecracker version v1.13.1 and earlier and 1.14.0 on Linux may allow a local host user with write access to the pre-created jailer directories to overwrite arbitrary host files via a symlink attack during the initialization copy at jailer startup, if the jailer is executed with root privileges. To mitigate this issue, users should upgrade to version v1.13.2 or 1.14.1 or above.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 6.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H/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
References
Description

An information disclosure vulnerability exists in the /srvs/membersrv/getCashiers endpoint of the Aptsys gemscms backend platform thru 2025-05-28. This unauthenticated endpoint returns a list of cashier accounts, including names, email addresses, usernames, and passwords hashed using MD5. As MD5 is a broken cryptographic function, the hashes can be easily reversed using public tools, exposing user credentials in plaintext. This allows remote attackers to perform unauthorized logins and potentially gain access to sensitive POS operations or backend functions.

Published
Date
2026-01-23
Updated
Date
2026-01-23
References