Comparison Overview
University of South Carolina
University of South Carolina
Columbia, SC, US, 29208
Last Update: 02/04/2026
With thriving academic and research excellence and a lively, welcoming student experience, the University of South Carolina brings the opportunities of higher education to new generations. South Carolina's unrivaled college experience has been sought by students, facul...
The University of Texas at Austin
1 University Station, Austin, TX, US, 78712
Last Update: 12/09/2026
The University of Texas at Austin is one of the largest public universities in the United States. Founded in 1883, the University has grown from a single building, eight teachers, two departments and 221 students to a 350-acre main campus with 21,000 faculty and staff, ...
Compliance Ranges Comparison
University of South Carolina
The University of Texas at Austin
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for University of South Carolina in 2026.
Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for The University of Texas at Austin in 2026.
Incident History - University of South Carolina (X = Date, Y = Severity)
University of South Carolina cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - The University of Texas at Austin (X = Date, Y = Severity)
The University of Texas at Austin cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents
University of South Carolina
The University of Texas at Austin
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
HTTP/2 servers could end up crashing due to inadvertently modifying its HPACK encoder concurrently. This happens because the server modifies the HPACK encoder from two goroutines without synchronization: one uses the encoder to encode a HEADERS frame as part of a response sent to a client and the other modifies the encoder's table size when handling a SETTINGS frame containing SETTINGS_HEADER_TABLE_SIZE that a client sends. A malicious client can repeatedly send a request while changing the header table size to crash the server.
Multiple ECH outer extension references are not permitted under RFC 9849; previously, a client could send a well-crafted packet that could trigger memory exhaustion in the server process by specifying multiple references. We now reject these as malformed and curb the memory amplification vector as a result.
A trusted template author may have previously written a valid template wherein the use of the 'yield' keyword would not be correctly escaped. We now ensure that valid keyword uses are escaped and non-keyword uses are not escaped.
Improper certificate validation in Microsoft Partner Center allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.
Authorization bypass through user-controlled key in Microsoft Bookings allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.