Comparison Overview

Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science

VS

University of Leeds

Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science

3333 Green Bay Road, North Chicago, IL, 60064-3095, US
Last Update: 2025-03-04 (UTC)
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.rosalindfranklin.edu

Rosalind Franklin University is a graduate-level institution with 2,000 students dedicated to health sciences and located in North Chicago, Illinois, approximately 35 miles north of downtown Chicago. Its beautiful 97-acre campus is home to the Basic Science Building, the Health Science Building, the Morningstar Interprofessional Education Center, Multi-media Dr. John J. Sheinin Gross Anatomy Lab, Education and Evaluation Center, three student residence halls and the Rosalind Franklin University Health System. RFU is a national leader in interprofessional medical and healthcare education, offering a doctor of medicine program through the Chicago Medical School, doctor of podiatric medicine program through the Dr. William M. Scholl College of Podiatric Medicine, a doctor of pharmacy through the College of Pharmacy, and a range of degrees through its College of Health Professions, including nurse anesthesia, nutrition, physical therapy, pathologists’ assistant and physician assistant. The University also offers advanced biomedical degrees through the School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies. In 2018, the university broke ground on the Innovation and Research Park, which will add nearly 100,000 square feet of space to campus. The park continues our heritage of research that impacts the world.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 1,297
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

University of Leeds

Woodhouse Lane, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS2 9JT, GB
Last Update: 2025-03-04 (UTC)
Between 750 and 799
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/

Leeds is among the top ten universities for research power in the UK. Our academic breadth, commitment to quality and determination to make a genuine impact on the world around us enables us to achieve extraordinary results in: • Creating knowledge through research and innovation. • Disseminating it through excellent student education. • Applying it to make a difference to society, culture and the economy. We have over 34,000 students, over 7,000 members of staff and a global network of more than 240,000 alumni. Integrating research and learning and teaching is at the heart of our strategy. Our courses are taught by staff who are engaged in world-class research and cutting-edge professional practice. We have strong ties with industry, and work with organisations of all sizes. Our outstanding entrepreneurial record of commercialising our research has seen us launch more spin-out companies on the AIM stock market than any other UK university.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 13,923
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rosalind-franklin-university.jpeg
Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science
—
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/university-of-leeds.jpeg
University of Leeds
—
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
Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
University of Leeds
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science in 2025.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for University of Leeds in 2025.

Incident History — Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — University of Leeds (X = Date, Y = Severity)

University of Leeds cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rosalind-franklin-university.jpeg
Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/university-of-leeds.jpeg
University of Leeds
Incidents

Date Detected: 05/2020
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Compromised Software Supplier
Blog: Blog

FAQ

University of Leeds company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

University of Leeds company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company has not reported any.

In the current year, University of Leeds company and Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither University of Leeds company nor Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither University of Leeds company nor Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither University of Leeds company nor Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company nor University of Leeds company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science nor University of Leeds holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company nor University of Leeds company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

University of Leeds company employs more people globally than Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science company, reflecting its scale as a Higher Education.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science nor University of Leeds holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science nor University of Leeds holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science nor University of Leeds holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science nor University of Leeds holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science nor University of Leeds holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science nor University of Leeds holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Deck Mate 1 executes firmware directly from an external EEPROM without verifying authenticity or integrity. An attacker with physical access can replace or reflash the EEPROM to run arbitrary code that persists across reboots. Because this design predates modern secure-boot or signed-update mechanisms, affected systems should be physically protected or retired from service. The vendor has not indicated that firmware updates are available for this legacy model.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/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
References
Description

Deck Mate 2 lacks a verified secure-boot chain and runtime integrity validation for its controller and display modules. Without cryptographic boot verification, an attacker with physical access can modify or replace the bootloader, kernel, or filesystem and gain persistent code execution on reboot. This weakness allows long-term firmware tampering that survives power cycles. The vendor indicates that more recent firmware updates strengthen update-chain integrity and disable physical update ports to mitigate related attack avenues.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/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
References
Description

Deck Mate 2's firmware update mechanism accepts packages without cryptographic signature verification, encrypts them with a single hard-coded AES key shared across devices, and uses a truncated HMAC for integrity validation. Attackers with access to the update interface - typically via the unit's USB update port - can craft or modify firmware packages to execute arbitrary code as root, allowing persistent compromise of the device's integrity and deck randomization process. Physical or on-premises access remains the most likely attack path, though network-exposed or telemetry-enabled deployments could theoretically allow remote exploitation if misconfigured. The vendor confirmed that firmware updates have been issued to correct these update-chain weaknesses and that USB update access has been disabled on affected units.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/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
References
Description

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption vulnerability in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS bc-fips on All (API modules), Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java LTS bcprov-lts8on on All (API modules) allows Excessive Allocation. This vulnerability is associated with program files core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/fips/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCFB.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeEngine.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCBC.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeGCMSIV.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCCM.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/engines/AESNativeCTR.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA256NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA224NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA3NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHAKENativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA512NativeDigest.Java, core/src/main/jdk1.9/org/bouncycastle/crypto/digests/SHA384NativeDigest.Java. This issue affects Bouncy Castle for Java FIPS: from 2.1.0 through 2.1.1; Bouncy Castle for Java LTS: from 2.73.0 through 2.73.7.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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:P/AU:N/R:U/V:C/RE:M/U:Amber
References
Description

Wasmtime is a runtime for WebAssembly. In versions from 38.0.0 to before 38.0.3, the implementation of component-model related host-to-wasm trampolines in Wasmtime contained a bug where it's possible to carefully craft a component, which when called in a specific way, would crash the host with a segfault or assert failure. Wasmtime 38.0.3 has been released and is patched to fix this issue. There are no workarounds.

Published
Date
2025-10-24
Updated
Date
2025-10-24
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:L/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