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

Comparison Overview

OpenCommit FoundationOpenCommit Foundation
VS
Boys & Girls Clubs of AmericaBoys & Girls Clubs of America
OpenCommit Foundation

OpenCommit Foundation

Leiden, NL

Last Update: 28/05/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.opencommit.eu
748/1000Moderate

Stichting OpenCommit is dedicated to promoting, supporting, and sustainably managing Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS/OSS). Our foundation is non-profit and aims to serve the public interest by: - Building, managing, and freely providing services based on op...

NAICS:8135
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:1
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Boys & Girls Clubs of America

Boys & Girls Clubs of America

1275 Peachtree St NE, Atlanta, Georgia, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.bgca.org
783/1000Fair

Boys & Girls Clubs of America does whatever it takes for America’s youth to have great futures. As the nation's premier (nonprofit) youth development organization, our programs, training and services support millions of kids and teens every year. We hire employees who ...

NAICS:8135
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:10,959
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
OpenCommit Foundation

OpenCommit Foundation

-
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
Boys & Girls Clubs of America

Boys & Girls Clubs of America

-
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 Non-profit Organizations Industry Avg (This Year)

OpenCommit Foundation has 38.65% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Non-profit Organizations Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Boys & Girls Clubs of America in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - OpenCommit Foundation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

OpenCommit Foundation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Boys & Girls Clubs of America (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Boys & Girls Clubs of America cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
OpenCommit Foundation

OpenCommit Foundation

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Vulnerability
ANISTI1779971086
Boys & Girls Clubs of America

Boys & Girls Clubs of America

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation company and Boys & Girls Clubs of America company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation and Boys & Girls Clubs of America, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation and Boys & Girls Clubs of America, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - OpenCommit Foundation or Boys & Girls Clubs of America ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - OpenCommit Foundation or Boys & Girls Clubs of America ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation and Boys & Girls Clubs of America, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between OpenCommit Foundation and Boys & Girls Clubs of America, 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