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

Comparison Overview

Rutgers University–New BrunswickRutgers University–New Brunswick
VS
Texas Tech UniversityTexas Tech University
Rutgers University–New Brunswick

Rutgers University–New Brunswick

57 US Highway 1, New Brunswick, 08901, US

Last Update: 11/12/2025

View Profile
786/1000Fair

Rutgers University–New Brunswick is the flagship home of Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. We are a leading national research university committed to excellence in teaching, innovative research across a broad spectrum of subjects, and service that improves ou...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:6,640
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Texas Tech University

Texas Tech University

2500 Broadway, Lubbock, Texas, 79409, tx, US, 79409-5005

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.ttu.edu
732/1000Moderate

A new era of excellence is dawning at Texas Tech University as it stands on the cusp of being one of the nation's premier research institutions. Research and enrollment numbers are at record levels, which cement Texas Tech's commitment to attracting and retaining qualit...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:11,327
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Rutgers University–New Brunswick

Rutgers University–New Brunswick

-
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
Texas Tech University

Texas Tech 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 Rutgers University–New Brunswick in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Texas Tech University in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Rutgers University–New Brunswick (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rutgers University–New Brunswick cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - Texas Tech University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Texas Tech 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...
Rutgers University–New Brunswick

Rutgers University–New Brunswick

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Texas Tech University

Texas Tech University

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
TEX000121824

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-103761
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a memory exhaustion vulnerability in TransferMetadata::receivePeerNotify that allows unauthenticated attackers to grow process memory without limit. Attackers can repeatedly send notify frames up to 1 MB to the handshake RPC port, filling the uncapped notifys vector until the out-of-memory killer terminates the engine.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/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:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-103760
SUMMARY

Mooncake transfer engine through 0.3.13.post1 contains a denial of service vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to block the handshake daemon by never reading replies. Attackers can send a Metadata request to the handshake RPC port and stall SocketHandShakePlugin's single listener thread in writeFully(), breaking all subsequent handshakes, metadata fetches, notify and probe requests.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/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:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2025-71427
SUMMARY

Office-PowerPoint-MCP-Server through 2.0.7 contains a path traversal vulnerability that allows MCP callers to write and read files outside the working directory by supplying absolute paths or ../ sequences. Attackers can steer an AI agent via prompt injection to abuse save_presentation, open_presentation, or manage_image output_path to overwrite any server-writable file or load external files.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-86344
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in 389-ds-base. An unauthenticated remote attacker can send a complete LDAP operation followed by the first bytes of an incomplete LDAPMessage on the same connection, causing the server to hand that connection to a second worker thread before the first worker's result is flushed. The second worker blocks until nsslapd-ioblocktimeout while holding the connection mutex, preventing delivery of the completed operation's result. Repeating this across a small number of connections proportional to the configured worker-thread pool size exhausts the entire pool under default configuration, denying service to all clients (anonymous and authenticated, plaintext and TLS) for as long as the attacker maintains the connections.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-71454
SUMMARY

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') vulnerability in CWE-79 - Cross-site Scripting CAPEC-63 allows Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). This issue affects CAPEC-63: before 3.0b63.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-01
UPDATED
Date2026-10-01
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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