Comparison Overview

Stanford University School of Medicine

VS

University of Johannesburg

Stanford University School of Medicine

291 Campus Dr, Palo Alto, CA, 94305, US
Last Update: 2025-11-22
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://med.stanford.edu

Stanford Medicine improves health through leadership, diversity and collaborative discoveries and innovation in health care, education and research. The Stanford School of Medicine is a premier setting for integrated research, medical education and clinical care. As the academic hub of Stanford Medicine, which also comprises adult and pediatric health care delivery systems, it fuels discovery and innovation to advance human health while empowering the medical and scientific leaders of tomorrow. Learn more at med.stanford.edu/school.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 8,798
Subsidiaries: 21
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1
View Profile

University of Johannesburg

Kingsway and University Rds, Auckland Park, Johannesburg, Gauteng, 2006, ZA
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 800 and 849
http://www.uj.ac.za/

It is the vision of the University of Johannesburg to be a premier, embracing, African city university offering a mix of vocational and academic programmes that advances freedom, democracy, equality and human dignity as high ideals of humanity through distinguished scholarship, excellence in teaching, reputable research and innovation, and through putting intellectual capital to work.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 11,877
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/stanford-university-school-of-medicine.jpeg
Stanford University School of Medicine
—
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-johannesburg.jpeg
University of Johannesburg
—
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
Stanford University School of Medicine
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
University of Johannesburg
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Stanford University School of Medicine in 2025.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for University of Johannesburg in 2025.

Incident History — Stanford University School of Medicine (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Stanford University School of Medicine cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

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

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/stanford-university-school-of-medicine.jpeg
Stanford University School of Medicine
Incidents

Date Detected: 02/2019
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: URL Manipulation
Motivation: Unauthorized Access to Sensitive Information
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2017
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/university-of-johannesburg.jpeg
University of Johannesburg
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

University of Johannesburg company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Stanford University School of Medicine company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Stanford University School of Medicine company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas University of Johannesburg company has not reported any.

In the current year, University of Johannesburg company and Stanford University School of Medicine company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither University of Johannesburg company nor Stanford University School of Medicine company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Stanford University School of Medicine company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other University of Johannesburg company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither University of Johannesburg company nor Stanford University School of Medicine company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Stanford University School of Medicine company nor University of Johannesburg company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Stanford University School of Medicine nor University of Johannesburg holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Stanford University School of Medicine company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to University of Johannesburg company.

University of Johannesburg company employs more people globally than Stanford University School of Medicine company, reflecting its scale as a Higher Education.

Neither Stanford University School of Medicine nor University of Johannesburg holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Stanford University School of Medicine nor University of Johannesburg holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Stanford University School of Medicine nor University of Johannesburg holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Stanford University School of Medicine nor University of Johannesburg holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Stanford University School of Medicine nor University of Johannesburg holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Stanford University School of Medicine nor University of Johannesburg holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: 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
References
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
References
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
References