Comparison Overview

The Archives of Falconry

VS

Canadian Museum for Human Rights

The Archives of Falconry

5668 W Flying Hawk Ln, Boise, Idaho, US, 83709
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 750 and 799

The Archives of Falconry was founded in 1986 by several visionary falconers who were also leaders of The Peregrine Fund. We have since grown into a world-renowned repository of falconry material culture and historical records. The Archives collects and preserves falconry heritage and the legacy of notable falconers, including their correspondence, memorabilia, art, crafts, and life stories. The Archives also interprets significant events in falconry history and celebrates the role of falconers in the birth of raptor conservation. We are a destination for falconers, sportsmen and women, scholars, journalists, and other interested public - to visit, support, learn, and explore this 4500-year-old connection between humans and birds of prey.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 6
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Canadian Museum for Human Rights

85 Israel Asper Way, Winnipeg, R3C 0L5, CA
Last Update: 2026-01-23
Between 750 and 799

The Canadian Museum for Human Rights (CMHR) is the first museum in the world solely dedicated to the evolution, celebration and future of human rights. It is the first national museum in Canada to be built outside the National Capital Region. Located in the heart of Canada in Winnipeg, Manitoba, the CMHR rises from the Prairie earth at The Forks, that has been a meeting place for over six thousand years. The CMHR delivers an immersive, interactive and memorable experience for visitors of every background, age and ability. Each visitor has access to a fully reinvented museum experience that reflects a design approach that sets new Canadian and world standards for inclusion and universal accessibility. We are seeking talented individuals who are motivated to share their passion and commitment to join our team. Together, we aim to enhance the public's understanding of human rights, to promote respect for others, and to encourage reflection and dialogue.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 178
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/the-archives-of-falconry.jpeg
The Archives of Falconry
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/canadian-museum-for-human-rights.jpeg
Canadian Museum for Human Rights
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
The Archives of Falconry
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Canadian Museum for Human Rights
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The Archives of Falconry in 2026.

Incidents vs Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Canadian Museum for Human Rights in 2026.

Incident History — The Archives of Falconry (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Archives of Falconry cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Canadian Museum for Human Rights (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Canadian Museum for Human Rights cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/the-archives-of-falconry.jpeg
The Archives of Falconry
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/canadian-museum-for-human-rights.jpeg
Canadian Museum for Human Rights
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both The Archives of Falconry company and Canadian Museum for Human Rights company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Canadian Museum for Human Rights company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to The Archives of Falconry company.

In the current year, Canadian Museum for Human Rights company and The Archives of Falconry company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Canadian Museum for Human Rights company nor The Archives of Falconry company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Canadian Museum for Human Rights company nor The Archives of Falconry company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Canadian Museum for Human Rights company nor The Archives of Falconry company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither The Archives of Falconry company nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither The Archives of Falconry nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither The Archives of Falconry company nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Canadian Museum for Human Rights company employs more people globally than The Archives of Falconry company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither The Archives of Falconry nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither The Archives of Falconry nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither The Archives of Falconry nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither The Archives of Falconry nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither The Archives of Falconry nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights holds HIPAA certification.

Neither The Archives of Falconry nor Canadian Museum for Human Rights holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N