Comparison Overview

The University of Georgia

VS

New York University

The University of Georgia

Administration Building, Athens, GA, US, 30602
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 800 and 849

The University of Georgia, a land-grant and sea-grant university with state-wide commitments and responsibilities, is the state's flagship institution of higher education. It is also the state's oldest, most comprehensive and most diversified institution of higher education. Its motto, "to teach, to serve and to inquire into the nature of things,"​ reflects the university's integral and unique role in the conservation and enhancement of the state's and nation's intellectual, cultural and environmental heritage.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 17,275
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

New York University

70 Washington Sq South, New York, NY, US, 10012-1091
Last Update: 2026-01-21
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: 26,355
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/university-of-georgia.jpeg
The University of Georgia
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
The University of Georgia
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 The University of Georgia in 2026.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for New York University in 2026.

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

The University of Georgia 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/university-of-georgia.jpeg
The University of Georgia
Incidents

No Incident

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

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

New York University company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas The University of Georgia company has not reported any.

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

Neither New York University company nor The University of Georgia company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

New York University company has disclosed at least one data breach, while The University of Georgia company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither New York University company nor The University of Georgia company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither The University of Georgia company nor New York University company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither The University of Georgia nor New York University holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

New York University company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to The University of Georgia company.

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

Neither The University of Georgia nor New York University holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither The University of Georgia nor New York University holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither The University of Georgia nor New York University holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither The University of Georgia nor New York University holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither The University of Georgia nor New York University holds HIPAA certification.

Neither The University of Georgia nor New York University holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper validation of specified type of input in M365 Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
Description

Moonraker is a Python web server providing API access to Klipper 3D printing firmware. In versions 0.9.3 and below, instances configured with the "ldap" component enabled are vulnerable to LDAP search filter injection techniques via the login endpoint. The 401 error response message can be used to determine whether or not a search was successful, allowing for brute force methods to discover LDAP entries on the server such as user IDs and user attributes. This issue has been fixed in version 0.10.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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

Runtipi is a Docker-based, personal homeserver orchestrator that facilitates multiple services on a single server. Versions 3.7.0 and above allow an authenticated user to execute arbitrary system commands on the host server by injecting shell metacharacters into backup filenames. The BackupManager fails to sanitize the filenames of uploaded backups. The system persists user-uploaded files directly to the host filesystem using the raw originalname provided in the request. This allows an attacker to stage a file containing shell metacharacters (e.g., $(id).tar.gz) at a predictable path, which is later referenced during the restore process. The successful storage of the file is what allows the subsequent restore command to reference and execute it. This issue has been fixed in version 4.7.0.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H