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

Comparison Overview

UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i)UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i)
VS
Rutgers UniversityRutgers University
UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i)

UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i)

Samuels Building, Gate 11, Botany Street UNSW Kensington Campus , Sydney, NSW, 2052, AU

Last Update: 31/12/2025

View Profile

A/Prof Natalie Taylor spearheads Implementation to Impact (i2i), where the focus is on applying implementation science to bridge the gap between evidence and practice. Our mission is to ensure that the latest research and evidence-based practices are seamlessly integrat...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:0
Subsidiaries:30
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Rutgers University

Rutgers University

57 US Highway 1, New Brunswick, 08901, US

Last Update: 24/06/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://www.rutgers.edu
680/1000Weak

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, stands among America’s highest-ranked, most diverse public research universities. The oldest, largest, and top-ranked public university in the New York/New Jersey metropolitan area, you’ll find us at our main locations in thr...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:18,275
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i)

UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i)

-
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
Rutgers University

Rutgers University

-
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 Implementation to Impact (i2i) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

Rutgers University has 191.26% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) 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 - Rutgers University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rutgers University 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 Implementation to Impact (i2i)

UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Rutgers University

Rutgers University

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
INSRUTUDEHARCOL1782312004
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
THEYALRUTHARSTAINSPRI1778258906
🔒 Incident : Breach
MCGVERHARUDE1777034314

FAQ

Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) company and Rutgers University company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) and Rutgers University, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) and Rutgers University, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) or Rutgers University ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) or Rutgers University ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) and Rutgers University, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between UNSW Implementation to Impact (i2i) and Rutgers University, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-71983
SUMMARY

MSI Radix AXE6600 router firmware version v781521 contains a command injection vulnerability in the wps.cgi interface that allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands by injecting malicious input through the pin2g, pin5g, or pin6g parameters. Attackers can exploit these unsanitized parameters to execute arbitrary commands on the affected device and obtain root privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-71502
SUMMARY

CTI-Transmute contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability caused by insufficient neutralization of Vue template expression delimiters in server-rendered user-controlled data. An unauthenticated attacker can create a public conversion whose name or description contains a malicious Vue expression using the application's configured [[ ... ]] delimiters. User profile names may provide an additional injection vector. Although Jinja HTML escaping is applied, the resulting value is subsequently included in a DOM region compiled by Vue. Vue interprets the attacker-controlled value as a template expression rather than ordinary text. By accessing the JavaScript Function constructor from within the expression, an attacker can execute arbitrary JavaScript in the security context of the CTI-Transmute origin. The application's nonce-based Content Security Policy does not prevent exploitation because the Vue runtime compiler requires the unsafe-eval policy exception. The malicious payload is stored by the application and executed whenever another user opens an affected page, such as the public conversion detail page. The victim may be a normal user or an administrator. Successful exploitation could allow the attacker to: * Access data available to the victim through the application. * Extract API keys, tokens, or other sensitive information exposed to the page. * Perform authenticated actions using the victim's session. * Modify conversions or other application data. * Escalate the impact by targeting an administrator. A demonstrated payload can use [].constructor.constructor(...) to obtain the JavaScript Function constructor and execute arbitrary code. The regression tests also show that a short first-stage payload could retrieve an uncapped conversion description and evaluate a larger second-stage payload. The patch addresses the vulnerability by registering a global Jinja finalize hook that inserts a zero-width Unicode word joiner inside every Vue delimiter found in server-rendered values. This prevents Vue from recognizing the values as template expressions while preserving their visible representation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-71958
SUMMARY

D-Link DWR-M961 devices with hardware version C1 and software version 1.1.2_C1_202602110044 contain a buffer overflow vulnerability in the quicksetup.cgi interface. A remote attacker can write overly long strings to the test4, ssid2, and username fields and execute arbitrary commands by crafting a specific payload, or cause the device to crash.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-71957
SUMMARY

D-Link DWR-M961 devices with hardware version C1 and software version 1.1.2_C1_202602110044 contain a buffer overflow vulnerability in the app.cgi interface. A remote attacker can write an overly long string to the netAcc.addlist[].name field and execute arbitrary commands by crafting a specific payload, or cause the device to crash.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-71956
SUMMARY

D-Link DWR-M961 devices with hardware version C1 and software version 1.1.2_C1_202602110044 contain a command injection vulnerability in the app.cgi interface. A remote attacker can inject arbitrary malicious commands into the netDig.ping.dst field, resulting in command execution with root privileges.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-08
UPDATED
Date2026-08-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9