Comparison Overview

The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago

VS

Crow Museum of Asian Art

The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago

undefined, undefined, undefined, 60637, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.renaissancesociety.org

Founded in 1915, the "Ren" is a non-collecting museum of contemporary art that renowned program of international exhibitions and new music. The Renaissance Society is at its core a space of possibility. For artists, we offer an unfettered platform for bold experimentation. Our work with artists frequently results in newly commissioned art, and these presentations in our gallery at the University of Chicago spur further scholarly and creative reflections in our publications and public programs. For visitors, we offer intimate opportunities to engage deeply with art and artists who provide critical responses to our present moment. All exhibitions and events are free to attend. Visitors to the Ren find a uniquely intimate platform for encountering artistic expressions that give form to, challenge, and complicate currents in contemporary thought. Events—including artist talks, lectures, screenings, concerts, readings, and more—offer further opportunities for discovery and discussion. We maintain robust archives, which can be accessed by all visitors, art historians, students, and other institutions by making an appointment.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 17
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Crow Museum of Asian Art

2010 Flora St, Dallas, Texas, undefined, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799
http://crowmuseum.org

The Crow Museum of Asian Art inspires and promotes learning and dialogue about the arts and cultures of Asia through our exhibitions, the research and preservation of our collections, artistic and educational programming, and visitor experience and engagement. We accomplish this in accordance with the highest professional standards, through collaboration with our diverse public and partners in our communities, nationally, and internationally. We define Asia as endlessly diverse, and not of one place, time, or idea. By cultivating compassion and inclusivity through our work, we build greater awareness and a shared sense of what it means to be human.

NAICS: 712
NAICS Definition: Museums, Historical Sites, and Similar Institutions
Employees: 58
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-renaissance-society-at-the-university-of-chicago.jpeg
The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago
—
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/crow-museum-of-asian-art.jpeg
Crow Museum of Asian Art
—
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 Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Crow Museum of Asian Art
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 Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for Crow Museum of Asian Art in 2026.

Incident History — The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Crow Museum of Asian Art (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Crow Museum of Asian Art cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/the-renaissance-society-at-the-university-of-chicago.jpeg
The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/crow-museum-of-asian-art.jpeg
Crow Museum of Asian Art
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company and Crow Museum of Asian Art company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Crow Museum of Asian Art company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company.

In the current year, Crow Museum of Asian Art company and The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Crow Museum of Asian Art company nor The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Crow Museum of Asian Art company nor The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Crow Museum of Asian Art company nor The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company nor Crow Museum of Asian Art company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago nor Crow Museum of Asian Art holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company nor Crow Museum of Asian Art company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Crow Museum of Asian Art company employs more people globally than The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago company, reflecting its scale as a Museums, Historical Sites, and Zoos.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago nor Crow Museum of Asian Art holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago nor Crow Museum of Asian Art holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago nor Crow Museum of Asian Art holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago nor Crow Museum of Asian Art holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago nor Crow Museum of Asian Art holds HIPAA certification.

Neither The Renaissance Society at The University of Chicago nor Crow Museum of Asian Art 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.

Published
Date
2026-01-21
Updated
Date
2026-01-21
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2026-01-21
Updated
Date
2026-01-21
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2026-01-21
Updated
Date
2026-01-21
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2026-01-21
Updated
Date
2026-01-21
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2026-01-21
Updated
Date
2026-01-21
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
References