Comparison Overview

Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc.

VS

Santa Barbara Foundation

Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc.

PO Box 2369, Annapolis, Maryland, 21401, US
Last Update: 2026-04-04
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://phillipsgrants.org

Phillips Charitable Foundation supports charitable organizations that provide a genuine impact on the lives of others by solving problems, removing obstacles, and leading to lasting solutions. Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. is a private charitable foundation founded in 2016 by Eileen Gross at the request of Howard W. Phillips Jr. Mr. Phillips was a 1944 graduate of Landon School and a 1950 graduate of Lehigh University. He remained an active and engaged Alumni for both institutions. He was successful in business, leading the second generation of his family’s business ventures in insurance and real estate investments. We Support: Humanitarianism: Preserving human dignity through solution-driven endeavors to improve self-sufficiency Arts and Culture: Strengthening society through arts and culture Education: Innovative and engaging approaches to learning

NAICS: 813
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 3
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Santa Barbara Foundation

1111 Chapala Street, Suite 200, Santa Barbara, 93101, US
Last Update: 2026-04-02
Between 750 and 799
http://www.sbfoundation.org

The Santa Barbara Foundation is the largest community foundation in the region and Santa Barbara County’s go-to resource for investment and capacity-building as well as a key convener of people and organizations. The foundation has provided support to nearly every Santa Barbara County nonprofit organization and essential community project in its 90-year history. Connecting those who give, with those in need and all who dream of a better community. To learn more please visit SBFoundation.org.

NAICS: 8132
NAICS Definition: Grantmaking and Giving Services
Employees: 58
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/phillips-charitable-foundation-inc.jpeg
Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc.
—
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/santa-barbara-foundation.jpeg
Santa Barbara Foundation
—
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
Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Santa Barbara Foundation
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Philanthropic Fundraising Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. in 2026.

Incidents vs Philanthropic Fundraising Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Santa Barbara Foundation in 2026.

Incident History — Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Santa Barbara Foundation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Santa Barbara Foundation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/phillips-charitable-foundation-inc.jpeg
Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/santa-barbara-foundation.jpeg
Santa Barbara Foundation
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Santa Barbara Foundation company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Santa Barbara Foundation company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company.

In the current year, Santa Barbara Foundation company and Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Santa Barbara Foundation company nor Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Santa Barbara Foundation company nor Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Santa Barbara Foundation company nor Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company nor Santa Barbara Foundation company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. nor Santa Barbara Foundation holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company nor Santa Barbara Foundation company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Santa Barbara Foundation company employs more people globally than Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Philanthropic Fundraising Services.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. nor Santa Barbara Foundation holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. nor Santa Barbara Foundation holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. nor Santa Barbara Foundation holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. nor Santa Barbara Foundation holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. nor Santa Barbara Foundation holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Phillips Charitable Foundation, Inc. nor Santa Barbara Foundation holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

nimiq/core-rs-albatross is a Rust implementation of the Nimiq Proof-of-Stake protocol based on the Albatross consensus algorithm. Prior to version 1.3.0, two peer-facing consensus request handlers assume that the history index is always available and call blockchain.history_store.history_index().unwrap() directly. That assumption is false by construction. HistoryStoreProxy::history_index() explicitly returns None for the valid HistoryStoreProxy::WithoutIndex state. when a full node is syncing or otherwise running without the history index, a remote peer can send RequestTransactionsProof or RequestTransactionReceiptsByAddress and trigger an Option::unwrap() panic on the request path. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.0.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 1.5.95, FileTools.download_file() in praisonaiagents validates the destination path but performs no validation on the url parameter, passing it directly to httpx.stream() with follow_redirects=True. An attacker who controls the URL can reach any host accessible from the server including cloud metadata services and internal network services. This issue has been patched in version 1.5.95.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.97, OAuthManager.validate_token() returns True for any token not found in its internal store, which is empty by default. Any HTTP request to the MCP server with an arbitrary Bearer token is treated as authenticated, granting full access to all registered tools and agent capabilities. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.97.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.97, the PraisonAI Gateway server accepts WebSocket connections at /ws and serves agent topology at /info with no authentication. Any network client can connect, enumerate registered agents, and send arbitrary messages to agents and their tool sets. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.97.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
References
Description

PraisonAI is a multi-agent teams system. Prior to version 4.5.90, MCPToolIndex.search_tools() compiles a caller-supplied string directly as a Python regular expression with no validation, sanitization, or timeout. A crafted regex causes catastrophic backtracking in the re engine, blocking the Python thread for hundreds of seconds and causing a complete service outage. This issue has been patched in version 4.5.90.

Published
Date
2026-04-03
Updated
Date
2026-04-03
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References