Comparison Overview

University of Maryland

VS

Georgia State University

University of Maryland

University of Maryland, College Park, MD, US, 20742
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

As the State's flagship, the University of Maryland (UMD) strives to bring students deeply into the process of discovery, innovation and entrepreneurship. Whenever possible, hands-on research complements classroom instruction. Interdisciplinary collaborations facilitate the understanding of complex problems like cybersecurity and climate change, and international study and diversity help our graduates become global citizens. Its location inside Washington, D.C.'s Beltway, along with its own Metro stop, gives students numerous opportunities to work with neighboring federal agencies and labs, think tanks and foreign organizations.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 21,026
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Georgia State University

33 Gilmer St. SE, Atlanta, GA, 30303, US
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

Georgia State is an urban public research university and national model for student success in Atlanta, the cultural and economic center of the Southeast. The largest university in the state and one of the largest in the nation, Georgia State provides its faculty and more than 51,000 students with unsurpassed access to opportunities in one of America's great global cities. Over a period of 10 years, the university raised graduation rates 22 percentage points and eliminated students achievement gaps based on race, ethnicity or income. Its Atlanta Campus offers more than 250 degree programs in 100 fields of study at the bachelor's, master's, specialist and doctoral levels. Home to more freshmen than any other college or university in Georgia, the university's Perimeter College provides more than 30 associate degree pathways at five campuses throughout metro Atlanta.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 12,338
Subsidiaries: 7
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-maryland.jpeg
University of Maryland
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/georgiastateuniversity.jpeg
Georgia State 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
University of Maryland
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Georgia State University
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 Maryland in 2025.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Georgia State University in 2025.

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

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

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

Georgia State 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-maryland.jpeg
University of Maryland
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2021
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/georgiastateuniversity.jpeg
Georgia State University
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

University of Maryland company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Georgia State University company has not reported any.

In the current year, Georgia State University company and University of Maryland company have not reported any cyber incidents.

University of Maryland company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Georgia State University company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Georgia State University company nor University of Maryland company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Georgia State University company nor University of Maryland company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither University of Maryland company nor Georgia State University company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither University of Maryland nor Georgia State University holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Georgia State University company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to University of Maryland company.

University of Maryland company employs more people globally than Georgia State University company, reflecting its scale as a Higher Education.

Neither University of Maryland nor Georgia State University holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither University of Maryland nor Georgia State University holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither University of Maryland nor Georgia State University holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither University of Maryland nor Georgia State University holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither University of Maryland nor Georgia State University holds HIPAA certification.

Neither University of Maryland nor Georgia State University 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