Comparison Overview

Rock County Historical Society

VS

SS Great Britain Trust

Rock County Historical Society

426 N JACKSON ST, Janesville, Wisconsin, 53548, US
Last Update: 2026-01-23
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://rchs.us

The Rock County Historical Society: Your Premier Resource for Historical Research, Thought-Provoking Programs, and Unique Historic Sites. RCHS, in partnership with the City of Janesville, is dedicated to preserving a campus of five historic sites just north of downtown Janesville. These sites highlight the rich history of Janesville and Rock County, Wisconsin. While our tradition centers on preserving history, our mission is to make history engaging and relevant for all residents and visitors.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 11
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

SS Great Britain Trust

Great Western Dockyard, Bristol, undefined, BS1 6TY, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799
http://ssgreatbritain.org

We are a heritage and education charity in Bristol that cares for the extraordinary 1843 ship SS Great Britain, the first modern ocean ship in the world, along with more than 70,000 historic objects and archives through our world-class conservation and education centre, the Brunel Institute. We are dedicated to inspiring engineers of the future with pioneering STEM outreach programmes, and to engaging the community and world around us through shared history and heritage. As a multi-award-winning visitor attraction on Bristol's iconic harbourside, we offer memorable experiences for all, from exciting family days out to hosting events, dinners, conferences, and even weddings aboard this piece of history. Want to get involved? Head to our ‘Support Us’ pages for information about volunteering, memberships, corporate partnerships and more.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 82
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/rock-county-historical-society.jpeg
Rock County Historical Society
—
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/ss-great-britain-trust.jpeg
SS Great Britain Trust
—
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
Rock County Historical Society
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
SS Great Britain Trust
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 Rock County Historical Society in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for SS Great Britain Trust in 2026.

Incident History — Rock County Historical Society (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rock County Historical Society cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — SS Great Britain Trust (X = Date, Y = Severity)

SS Great Britain Trust cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rock-county-historical-society.jpeg
Rock County Historical Society
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ss-great-britain-trust.jpeg
SS Great Britain Trust
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Rock County Historical Society company and SS Great Britain Trust company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, SS Great Britain Trust company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Rock County Historical Society company.

In the current year, SS Great Britain Trust company and Rock County Historical Society company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither SS Great Britain Trust company nor Rock County Historical Society company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither SS Great Britain Trust company nor Rock County Historical Society company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither SS Great Britain Trust company nor Rock County Historical Society company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Rock County Historical Society company nor SS Great Britain Trust company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Rock County Historical Society nor SS Great Britain Trust holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Rock County Historical Society company nor SS Great Britain Trust company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

SS Great Britain Trust company employs more people globally than Rock County Historical Society company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither Rock County Historical Society nor SS Great Britain Trust holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Rock County Historical Society nor SS Great Britain Trust holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Rock County Historical Society nor SS Great Britain Trust holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Rock County Historical Society nor SS Great Britain Trust holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Rock County Historical Society nor SS Great Britain Trust holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Rock County Historical Society nor SS Great Britain Trust 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