Comparison Overview
University of California, Santa Cruz

University of California, Santa Cruz
1156 High St, Santa Cruz, ca, US, 95064-1011
Last Update: 02/04/2026
UC Santa Cruz was founded in 1965 as the movement away from the conservative '50s was in full swing and America was experiencing a transformation. The founding faculty, administrators, and students embraced and embodied this change. They were open and revolutionary in t...

Uppsala University
Dag Hammarskjölds väg 7, Uppsala, Uppsala län, SE, 75105
Last Update: 05/05/2026
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 ...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

University of California, Santa Cruz







Uppsala University






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for University of California, Santa Cruz in 2026.
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.
Incident History - University of California, Santa Cruz (X = Date, Y = Severity)
University of California, Santa Cruz cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Uppsala University (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Uppsala University cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

University of California, Santa Cruz

Uppsala University
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
A vulnerability was identified in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. Affected is the function formWlEncrypt of the file /boafrm/formWlEncrypt. The manipulation of the argument submit-url leads to buffer overflow. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used.
A vulnerability was determined in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. This impacts the function formWlAc of the file /boafrm/formWlAc. Executing a manipulation of the argument submit-url can lead to buffer overflow. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.
A flaw was found in the OpenShift console. Unauthenticated access to the `/api/devfile/` and `/api/devfile/samples/` endpoints allows a remote attacker to send crafted devfile payloads. This can lead to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF), where the console pod makes requests to internal services and reflects partial responses to the attacker. Additionally, by sending repeated large requests without a specified content length, an attacker can cause unbounded memory growth, leading to a Denial of Service (DoS).
In Vinyl Cache before 9.0,2, workspace buffer overflow vulnerability was found in the .upper() and .lower() string type methods of VCL. This can be used as a remote denial of service (DoS) vector to make the child process segfault or assert, and then restart. Effectively exploiting this vulnerability requires prior knowledge about the VCL in use and the ability to craft a request that contains a string that is long enough to fill the remaining workspace at the call site while staying under the different request size limits (http_req_size, http_req_hdr_len, etc.).
A vulnerability was found in Totolink A3002MU Hh-B20211125.1046. This affects the function formSchedule of the file /boafrm/formSchedule. Performing a manipulation of the argument webpage results in buffer overflow. The attack is possible to be carried out remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used.