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

Comparison Overview

UCR Staff AssemblyUCR Staff Assembly
VS
Uppsala UniversityUppsala University
UCR Staff Assembly

UCR Staff Assembly

900 University Ave, Riverside, 92507, US

Last Update: 15/03/2026

View Profile
770/1000Fair

UCR Staff Assembly is an association of many employees dedicated to promoting the interests and welfare of all UCR staff. It seeks to inform, involve, connect and recognize staff in one of the fastest-growing campuses in the UC system.

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:56
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Uppsala University

Uppsala University

Dag Hammarskjölds väg 7, Uppsala, Uppsala län, SE, 75105

Last Update: 05/05/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.uu.se/
726/1000Moderate

Uppsala University strives to bring new perspectives to the basic questions of science as well as knowledge contributing to sustainable development and human health. We offer 39 different master programmes covering over 60 different specialisations. In Uppsala you walk ...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:10,289
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
UCR Staff Assembly

UCR Staff Assembly

-
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
Uppsala University

Uppsala 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 UCR Staff Assembly in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

Uppsala University has 2.91% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - UCR Staff Assembly (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UCR Staff Assembly cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Uppsala University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Uppsala 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...
UCR Staff Assembly

UCR Staff Assembly

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Uppsala University

Uppsala University

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
SUNUPP1778006932

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71194
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.2, the mDNS handler performs pool-blind lookups when resolving record queries and NOTIFY requests. When two zones with the same name exist across different pools, the lookup fails with a deterministic error, causing the handler to return REFUSED for all DNS queries through that path. The _handle_notify path is exploitable via a single unauthenticated UDP packet. This is independently reachable through the cross-tenant zone overlap described in a different recent CVE, and also affects legitimate same-tenant cross-pool configurations. BIND9 views do not mitigate this issue as mDNS is a shared service upstream of any view configuration.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-71193
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Designate before 22.0.1, zone creation checks (_is_subzone, _is_superzone, and the duplicate-zone DB constraint) are scoped to the target pool only. An authenticated user can bypass these checks by scheduling a zone to a different pool via the AttributeFilter scheduler, creating an overlapping zone that conflicts with another tenant's zone. This enables cross-tenant DNS hijack (redirecting traffic to attacker-controlled IPs) and DNS denial of service (NODATA responses). Exploitation requires a multi-pool deployment with AttributeFilter enabled in scheduler_filters, which is a non-default but documented and supported configuration for self-service tiering.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-49481
SUMMARY

UpSnap is a wake on lan web app. Versions prior to 5.4.0 have an OS command injection vulnerability in the UpSnap’s device management functionality due to the presence of unsafe shell command template interpolation using the ip and the mac fields. User-controlled values can be inserted into the wake_cmd and shutdown_cmd templates and executed via /bin/sh -c (Linux) or cmd /C (Windows) without sanitization, resulting in an authenticated Remote Code Execution (RCE). A low-privileged user with permission to create or edit devices can execute arbitrary operating system commands on the UpSnap hosted server. Version 5.4.0 patches the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.1
CVE-2026-47718
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. When `secureEnabled=true`, FUXA `1.3.0-2773` still allows guest and invalid-token requests to read project, alarms, and scheduler APIs. Version 1.3.1 fixes this issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-47717
SUMMARY

FUXA is a web-based Process Visualization (SCADA/HMI/Dashboard) software. In fuxa-server version 1.3.0, the GET /api/project endpoint exposes sensitive project configuration data to guest-context requests even when secureEnabled is enabled. Version 1.3.1 fixes the issue.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-12
UPDATED
Date2026-08-12
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9