Comparison Overview

PLOS Climate

VS

The New Yorker

PLOS Climate

San Francisco, US
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

PLOS Climate is an open-access journal that furthers understanding of climatic patterns, processes, impacts and solutions by publishing transparent, rigorous and open research from diverse perspectives. PLOS Climate provides a venue for all areas of climate research, with an emphasis on collaborative, interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary work that improves global and regional understanding of climate phenomena and informs critical strategies for combating climate change. For Mastodon & Twitter: https://linktr.ee/plosclimate

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition: Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Employees: 12
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

The New Yorker

1 World Trade Center, New York, NY, 10007, US
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

The New Yorker is a national weekly magazine that offers a signature mix of reporting and commentary on politics, foreign affairs, business, technology, popular culture, and the arts, along with humor, fiction, poetry, and cartoons. Founded in 1925, The New Yorker publishes the best writers of its time and has received more National Magazine Awards than any other magazine, for its groundbreaking reporting, authoritative analysis, and creative inspiration. The New Yorker takes readers beyond the weekly print magazine with the web, mobile, tablet, social media, and signature events. The New Yorker is at once a classic and at the leading edge.

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition: Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Employees: 1,369
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/plosclimate.jpeg
PLOS Climate
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/the-new-yorker.jpeg
The New Yorker
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
PLOS Climate
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
The New Yorker
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Book and Periodical Publishing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PLOS Climate in 2025.

Incidents vs Book and Periodical Publishing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The New Yorker in 2025.

Incident History — PLOS Climate (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PLOS Climate cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

The New Yorker cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/plosclimate.jpeg
PLOS Climate
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/the-new-yorker.jpeg
The New Yorker
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

The New Yorker company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to PLOS Climate company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, The New Yorker company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to PLOS Climate company.

In the current year, The New Yorker company and PLOS Climate company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither The New Yorker company nor PLOS Climate company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither The New Yorker company nor PLOS Climate company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither The New Yorker company nor PLOS Climate company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither PLOS Climate company nor The New Yorker company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither PLOS Climate nor The New Yorker holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

PLOS Climate company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to The New Yorker company.

The New Yorker company employs more people globally than PLOS Climate company, reflecting its scale as a Book and Periodical Publishing.

Neither PLOS Climate nor The New Yorker holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither PLOS Climate nor The New Yorker holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither PLOS Climate nor The New Yorker holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither PLOS Climate nor The New Yorker holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither PLOS Climate nor The New Yorker holds HIPAA certification.

Neither PLOS Climate nor The New Yorker holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ThingsBoard in versions prior to v4.2.1 allows an authenticated user to upload malicious SVG images via the "Image Gallery", leading to a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The exploit can be triggered when any user accesses the public API endpoint of the malicious SVG images, or if the malicious images are embedded in an `iframe` element, during a widget creation, deployed to any page of the platform (e.g., dashboards), and accessed during normal operations. The vulnerability resides in the `ImageController`, which fails to restrict the execution of JavaScript code when an image is loaded by the user's browser. This vulnerability can lead to the execution of malicious code in the context of other users' sessions, potentially compromising their accounts and allowing unauthorized actions.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to to verify that the token used during the code exchange originates from the same authentication flow, which allows an authenticated user to perform account takeover via a specially crafted email address used when switching authentication methods and sending a request to the /users/login/sso/code-exchange endpoint. The vulnerability requires ExperimentalEnableAuthenticationTransfer to be enabled (default: enabled) and RequireEmailVerification to be disabled (default: disabled).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to sanitize team email addresses to be visible only to Team Admins, which allows any authenticated user to view team email addresses via the GET /api/v4/channels/{channel_id}/common_teams endpoint

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Exposure of email service credentials to users without administrative rights in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Devolutions Server: before 2025.2.21, before 2025.3.9.

Description

Exposure of credentials in unintended requests in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Server: through 2025.2.20, through 2025.3.8.