Comparison Overview

University of North Texas

VS

The University of Manchester

University of North Texas

1155 Union Circle #311277, Denton, Tx, 76203-1277, US
Last Update: 2025-11-22
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://unt.edu

Ranked a Tier One research institution by the Carnegie Classification, UNT is one of the nation’s largest public research universities with more than 46,000 students who push creative boundaries and graduate with credentials of value so they can become tomorrow’s leaders. UNT is recognized as a Minority-Serving and Hispanic-Serving Institution, reflecting the population of Texas. UNT students earned nearly 13,000 degrees last year in 240 degree programs, many nationally and internationally recognized. With a focus on academic excellence and graduating career-ready students, UNT has served as a catalyst for creativity since its founding in 1890, continually fueling progress, entrepreneurship and innovation for the North Texas region, the state — and beyond.

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 12,668
Subsidiaries: 11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

The University of Manchester

Oxford Road, Manchester, undefined, M13 9PL, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749
https://www.manchester.ac.uk/discover/bicentenary

The University of Manchester is part of the prestigious Russell Group of universities and highly respected across the globe as a centre of teaching excellence and research innovation and discovery. With 25 Nobel Prize winners among our current and former staff and students, we have a history of world firsts, with our impact ranging from splitting the atom to giving the world graphene. Our outstanding facilities and wide range of undergraduate, postgraduate and CPD courses make us one of the most popular universities with students in the UK and internationally. We’re proud to have the largest alumni community of any campus-based university in the UK, with more than 500,000 graduates in more than 190 countries around the world. Our purpose is to advance education, knowledge and wisdom for the good of society, putting our three core goals of research and discovery, teaching and learning, and social responsibility at the heart of everything we do. #UoM200

NAICS: 6113
NAICS Definition: Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees: 18,574
Subsidiaries: 17
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/university-of-north-texas.jpeg
University of North Texas
—
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/university-of-manchester.jpeg
The University of Manchester
—
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 North Texas
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
The University of Manchester
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 North Texas in 2025.

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The University of Manchester in 2025.

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

University of North Texas cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

The University of Manchester 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-north-texas.jpeg
University of North Texas
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/university-of-manchester.jpeg
The University of Manchester
Incidents

Date Detected: 06/2023
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 09/2020
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

FAQ

University of North Texas company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to The University of Manchester company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

The University of Manchester company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas University of North Texas company has not reported any.

In the current year, The University of Manchester company and University of North Texas company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither The University of Manchester company nor University of North Texas company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither The University of Manchester company nor University of North Texas company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither The University of Manchester company nor University of North Texas company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither University of North Texas company nor The University of Manchester company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither University of North Texas nor The University of Manchester holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

The University of Manchester company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to University of North Texas company.

The University of Manchester company employs more people globally than University of North Texas company, reflecting its scale as a Higher Education.

Neither University of North Texas nor The University of Manchester holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither University of North Texas nor The University of Manchester holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither University of North Texas nor The University of Manchester holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither University of North Texas nor The University of Manchester holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither University of North Texas nor The University of Manchester holds HIPAA certification.

Neither University of North Texas nor The University of Manchester 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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-11-26
Updated
Date
2025-11-26
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
References