Comparison Overview

Temple University

VS

University of Johannesburg

Temple University

1801 N Broad St, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19122, US
Last Update: 2025-11-21
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.temple.edu

As the largest university in one of the nation’s most iconic cities, Temple educates diverse future leaders from across Philadelphia, the country and the world who share a common drive to learn, prepare for their careers and make a real impact. Founded as a night school by Russell Conwell in 1884, Temple University has evolved into an international powerhouse in higher education. Temple is a top-tier research institution with roughly 40,000 undergraduate, graduate and professional students, 17 schools and colleges, eight campuses and hundreds of degree programs.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 12,921
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
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/templeuniversity.jpeg
Temple University
—
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
Temple University
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 Temple University in 2025.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for University of Johannesburg in 2025.

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

Temple University 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/templeuniversity.jpeg
Temple University
Incidents

Date Detected: 06/2019
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Accidental Data Upload
Motivation: Accidental
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 Temple University company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Temple University 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 Temple University company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither University of Johannesburg company nor Temple University company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither University of Johannesburg company nor Temple University company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither University of Johannesburg company nor Temple University company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Temple University company nor University of Johannesburg company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Temple University nor University of Johannesburg holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Temple University company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to University of Johannesburg company.

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

Neither Temple University nor University of Johannesburg holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Temple University nor University of Johannesburg holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Temple University nor University of Johannesburg holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Temple University nor University of Johannesburg holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Temple University nor University of Johannesburg holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Temple University 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