Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

UNSW Social Policy Research CentreUNSW Social Policy Research Centre
VS
University of PennsylvaniaUniversity of Pennsylvania
UNSW Social Policy Research Centre

UNSW Social Policy Research Centre

N/A

Last Update: 25/04/2026

View Profile
771/1000Fair

The Social Policy Research Centre makes a positive impact through independent and leading research that tackles critical social issues.

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:0
Subsidiaries:40
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
University of Pennsylvania

University of Pennsylvania

3451 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, US, 19104-6303

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.upenn.edu/
684/1000Weak

The University of Pennsylvania is one of the oldest universities in America and, as a member of the Ivy League, one of the most prestigious institutions of higher learning in all the world. Penn is home to 12 schools including the School of Arts and Sciences, the School...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:22,599
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
UNSW Social Policy Research Centre

UNSW Social Policy Research Centre

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
University of Pennsylvania

University of Pennsylvania

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UNSW Social Policy Research Centre in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for University of Pennsylvania in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - UNSW Social Policy Research Centre (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UNSW Social Policy Research Centre cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - University of Pennsylvania (X = Date, Y = Severity)

University of Pennsylvania cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
UNSW Social Policy Research Centre

UNSW Social Policy Research Centre

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
University of Pennsylvania

University of Pennsylvania

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
UNI1764684299
🔒 Incident : Breach
UNI1692816110425

FAQ

Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre company and University of Pennsylvania company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre and University of Pennsylvania, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre and University of Pennsylvania, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - UNSW Social Policy Research Centre or University of Pennsylvania ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - UNSW Social Policy Research Centre or University of Pennsylvania ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre and University of Pennsylvania, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between UNSW Social Policy Research Centre and University of Pennsylvania, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1