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

Comparison Overview

Technische Universität GrazTechnische Universität Graz
VS
Queen's UniversityQueen's University
Technische Universität Graz

Technische Universität Graz

Rechbauerstraße 12, Graz, 8010, AT

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.tugraz.at
780/1000Fair

In world-wide competition with comparable institutions, Graz University of Technology pursues top teaching and research in the fields of the engineering sciences and the technical-natural sciences. An integral part of putting together excellent education and training pr...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:2,500
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Queen's University

Queen's University

99 University Avenue, Kingston K7L 3N6, Kingston, on, CA

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.queensu.ca
759/1000Fair

Queen’s University has a long history of scholarship, discovery, and innovation that shapes our collective knowledge and helps address some of the world’s most pressing challenges. Home to more than 25,000 students, Queen’s offers a comprehensive research-intensive envi...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:10,012
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Technische Universität Graz

Technische Universität Graz

-
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
Queen's University

Queen's University

-
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 Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Technische Universität Graz in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Queen's University in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Technische Universität Graz (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Technische Universität Graz cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Queen's University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Queen's University cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Technische Universität Graz

Technische Universität Graz

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Queen's University

Queen's University

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
QUE205428522

FAQ

Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Technische Universität Graz company and Queen's University company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Technische Universität Graz and Queen's University, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Technische Universität Graz and Queen's University, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Technische Universität Graz or Queen's University ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Technische Universität Graz or Queen's University ?
Between Technische Universität Graz and Queen's University, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Technische Universität Graz and Queen's University, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
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:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9