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

Comparison Overview

Otago Polytechnic | Te PūkengaOtago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga
VS
Rutgers UniversityRutgers University
Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga

Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga

Forth Street, Private Bag 1910, Dunedin, Dunedin, Otago, 9054, NZ

Last Update: 25/02/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.op.ac.nz/
775/1000Fair

Otago Polytechnic is a Business Division of Te Pūkenga – New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology. We are proud to be a leader in hands-on, career-focused education, achieving some of the best student achievement and satisfaction results in Australasia, and earni...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:883
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Rutgers University

Rutgers University

57 US Highway 1, New Brunswick, 08901, US

Last Update: 24/06/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.rutgers.edu
680/1000Weak

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, stands among America’s highest-ranked, most diverse public research universities. The oldest, largest, and top-ranked public university in the New York/New Jersey metropolitan area, you’ll find us at our main locations in thr...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:18,275
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga

Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga

-
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
Rutgers University

Rutgers 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 Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

Rutgers University has 191.26% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga 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 - Rutgers University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rutgers 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...
Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga

Otago Polytechnic | Te Pūkenga

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Rutgers University

Rutgers University

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
INSRUTUDEHARCOL1782312004
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
THEYALRUTHARSTAINSPRI1778258906
🔒 Incident : Breach
MCGVERHARUDE1777034314

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-90461
SUMMARY

OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-90460
SUMMARY

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90457
SUMMARY

The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90456
SUMMARY

An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90455
SUMMARY

A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA