Comparison Overview

UC Irvine

VS

Université de Montréal

UC Irvine

501 Aldrich Hall, Irvine, CA, 92697, US
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 800 and 849

Since 1965, the University of California, Irvine has combined the strengths of a major research university with the bounty of an incomparable Southern California location. As a U.S. News & World Report top 10 public university, UCI’s unyielding commitment to rigorous academics, cutting-edge research, and leadership and character development makes the campus a driving force for innovation and discovery that serves our local, national and global communities in many ways. With more than 37,000 students, 1,497 faculty members and 11,622 staff, UCI is among the most dynamic campuses in the University of California system. Increasingly a first-choice campus for students, UCI ranks among the top U.S. universities in the number of undergraduate applications and continues to admit freshmen with highly competitive academic profiles. UCI is also ranked No. 2 by U.S. News & World Report for social mobility, which takes into account the graduation rate of students awarded Pell Grants. Orange County’s second-largest employer, UCI generates an annual economic impact on the county of $7 billion. http://www.uci.edu/

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 13,853
Subsidiaries: 50
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
14
Attack type number
3

Université de Montréal

Station Centre-ville, H3C 3J7, Montreal, Montréal, QC, CA
Last Update: 2025-11-23
Between 750 and 799

Université de Montréal and its two affiliated schools, Polytechnique Montréal and HEC Montréal, is Quebec's biggest university complex and one of the largest in North America. Its 450,000 graduates make their presence felt around the globe and in every sphere of activity. Since 2018, UdeM has consistently ranked as one of Canada's top 100 employers.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 11,799
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/university-of-california-irvine.jpeg
UC Irvine
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/universite-de-montreal.jpeg
Université de Montréal
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
UC Irvine
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Université de Montréal
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UC Irvine in 2025.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Université de Montréal in 2025.

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

UC Irvine cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Université de Montréal (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Université de Montréal 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-california-irvine.jpeg
UC Irvine
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/universite-de-montreal.jpeg
Université de Montréal
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

UC Irvine company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Université de Montréal company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

UC Irvine company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Université de Montréal company has not reported any.

In the current year, Université de Montréal company and UC Irvine company have not reported any cyber incidents.

UC Irvine company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Université de Montréal company has not reported such incidents publicly.

UC Irvine company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Université de Montréal company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Université de Montréal company nor UC Irvine company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither UC Irvine company nor Université de Montréal company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither UC Irvine nor Université de Montréal holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

UC Irvine company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Université de Montréal company.

UC Irvine company employs more people globally than Université de Montréal company, reflecting its scale as a Higher Education.

Neither UC Irvine nor Université de Montréal holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither UC Irvine nor Université de Montréal holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither UC Irvine nor Université de Montréal holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither UC Irvine nor Université de Montréal holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither UC Irvine nor Université de Montréal holds HIPAA certification.

Neither UC Irvine nor Université de Montréal 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