Comparison Overview

University of Alberta

VS

UC San Diego

University of Alberta

Edmonton, T6G 2R3, Edmonton, ab, T6G 2R3, CA
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 800 and 849

The University of Alberta is one of Canada’s top teaching and research universities, with an international reputation for excellence across the humanities, sciences, creative arts, business, engineering, and health sciences. Home to more than 39,000 students and 15,000 faculty and staff, the university has an annual budget of $1.7 billion and attracts nearly $450 million in sponsored research revenue. The U of A offers close to 400 rigorous undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs in 18 faculties on five campuses. The university has more than 250,000 alumni worldwide. The university and its people remain dedicated to the promise made in 1908 by founding president Henry Marshall Tory that knowledge shall be used for “uplifting the whole people."​

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 15,583
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

UC San Diego

9500 Gilman Dr, La Jolla, CA, 92093, US
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 800 and 849

Recognized as one of the top 15 research universities worldwide, our culture of collaboration sparks discoveries that advance society and drive economic impact. Everything we do is dedicated to ensuring our students have the opportunity to become changemakers, equipped with the multidisciplinary tools needed to accelerate answers to our world’s most pressing issues.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 19,749
Subsidiaries: 18
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
14
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/university-of-alberta.jpeg
University of Alberta
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/ucsandiego.jpeg
UC San Diego
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
University of Alberta
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
UC San Diego
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for University of Alberta in 2025.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UC San Diego in 2025.

Incident History — University of Alberta (X = Date, Y = Severity)

University of Alberta cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — UC San Diego (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UC San Diego cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/university-of-alberta.jpeg
University of Alberta
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ucsandiego.jpeg
UC San Diego
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

FAQ

UC San Diego company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to University of Alberta company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

UC San Diego company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas University of Alberta company has not reported any.

In the current year, UC San Diego company and University of Alberta company have not reported any cyber incidents.

UC San Diego company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while University of Alberta company has not reported such incidents publicly.

UC San Diego company has disclosed at least one data breach, while University of Alberta company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither UC San Diego company nor University of Alberta company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither University of Alberta company nor UC San Diego company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither University of Alberta nor UC San Diego holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

UC San Diego company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to University of Alberta company.

UC San Diego company employs more people globally than University of Alberta company, reflecting its scale as a Higher Education.

Neither University of Alberta nor UC San Diego holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither University of Alberta nor UC San Diego holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither University of Alberta nor UC San Diego holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither University of Alberta nor UC San Diego holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither University of Alberta nor UC San Diego holds HIPAA certification.

Neither University of Alberta nor UC San Diego 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