Comparison Overview

UCLA

VS

New York University

UCLA

405 Hilgard Ave, Los Angeles, CA, 90095-1405, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

UCLA offers a combination that’s rare, especially among public research universities. The breadth, depth and inspired excellence among academic programs—from the visual and performing arts to the humanities, social sciences, STEM disciplines and health sciences—add up to endless opportunity. The location is unmatched: a campus that is unexpectedly picturesque and compact, set in a thriving and diverse global city.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 28,633
Subsidiaries: 50
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
14
Attack type number
3

New York University

70 Washington Sq South, New York, NY, US, 10012-1091
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Founded in 1831, NYU is one of the world’s foremost research universities and is a member of the selective Association of American Universities. The first Global Network University, NYU has degree-granting university campuses in New York and Abu Dhabi, and has announced a third in Shanghai; has a dozen other global academic sites, including London, Paris, Florence, Tel Aviv, Buenos Aires, and Accra; and sends more students to study abroad than any other U.S. college or university. Through its numerous schools and colleges, NYU conducts research and provides education in the arts and sciences, law, medicine, business, dentistry, education, nursing, the cinematic and performing arts, music and studio arts, public administration, social work, and continuing and professional studies, among other areas.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 25,592
Subsidiaries: 25
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ucla.jpeg
UCLA
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/new-york-university.jpeg
New York 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
Compliance Summary
UCLA
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
New York University
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UCLA in 2025.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for New York University in 2025.

Incident History — UCLA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UCLA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

New York University cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ucla.jpeg
UCLA
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2024
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 1/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Phishing
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2023
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/new-york-university.jpeg
New York University
Incidents

Date Detected: 05/2017
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Accidental Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/1989
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Website Defacement
Motivation: Response to a Supreme Court decision on affirmative action
Blog: Blog

FAQ

New York University company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to UCLA company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

UCLA company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to New York University company.

In the current year, New York University company and UCLA company have not reported any cyber incidents.

UCLA company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while New York University company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both New York University company and UCLA company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither New York University company nor UCLA company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither UCLA company nor New York University company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither UCLA nor New York University holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

UCLA company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to New York University company.

UCLA company employs more people globally than New York University company, reflecting its scale as a Higher Education.

Neither UCLA nor New York University holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither UCLA nor New York University holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither UCLA nor New York University holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither UCLA nor New York University holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither UCLA nor New York University holds HIPAA certification.

Neither UCLA nor New York University 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.

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
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.

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
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.

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
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.

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
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.

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