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

Comparison Overview

University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and DesignUniversity of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design
VS
The University of Texas at AustinThe University of Texas at Austin
University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design

University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design

1 Spadina Crescent, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2J5, CA

Last Update: 30/04/2026

View Profile
771/1000Fair

The John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design is a higher education institution based out of the University of Toronto in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:202
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
The University of Texas at Austin

The University of Texas at Austin

1 University Station, Austin, TX, US, 78712

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
https://www.utexas.edu/
815/1000Good

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, ...

NAICS:6113
NAICS Definition:Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools
Employees:26,129
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design

University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design

-
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
The University of Texas at Austin

The University of Texas at Austin

-
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 University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The University of Texas at Austin in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design (X = Date, Y = Severity)

University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design 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 - 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.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design

University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
The University of Texas at Austin

The University of Texas at Austin

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design company and The University of Texas at Austin company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design and The University of Texas at Austin, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design and The University of Texas at Austin, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design or The University of Texas at Austin ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design or The University of Texas at Austin ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design and The University of Texas at Austin, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between University of Toronto - John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Landscape, and Design and The University of Texas at Austin, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66720
SUMMARY

The GOOSE subscriber component improperly validates the UTC timestamp field in unauthenticated IEC 61850 GOOSE (EtherType 0x88B8) Layer-2 multicast messages. A specially crafted GOOSE frame containing an undersized timestamp field can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read during message processing, causing the process to crash and resulting in a denial-of-service condition.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66421
SUMMARY

OpenClaw Dashboard contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the administrator's browser session by injecting HTML markup into agent transcript messages processed through the sessions API. Attackers can craft a message containing inline event handler payloads such as an img tag with an onerror attribute within the 60-character rendering budget, which is stored in the session transcript and interpolated unsanitized into innerHTML on the default landing page, allowing theft of session tokens and unauthorized calls to authenticated administrative endpoints including agent instruction file modification.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/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
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66420
SUMMARY

MeshCentral 1.1.21 contains a cross-site WebSocket hijacking protection bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to hijack authenticated administrator sessions by exploiting an unconditional early return in the CheckWebServerOriginName() function within webserver.js when self-signed certificates are in use. Attackers can open cross-origin WebSocket connections to any of the twelve WebSocket endpoints, send crafted action commands to exfiltrate the server sessionKey used to sign session cookies, forge session tokens as arbitrary users, and gain full remote control of all managed devices governed by the MeshCentral instance.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/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
2.8
CVE-2026-66369
SUMMARY

The GOOSE parser contains an off-by-one boundary-handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer-2 multicast frame on the process bus. When specific GOOSE message fields are processed, the parser advances its internal buffer position incorrectly, resulting in a heap out-of-bounds read. On affected platforms, this condition reliably terminates the subscriber process and causes a denial-of-service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-66364
SUMMARY

The GOOSE payload parser contains a boundary handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer 2 multicast frame on the process bus. When processing specific payload fields, an attacker controlled inner element length may exceed its enclosing length, causing the parser to over read by one byte. This out-of-bounds read reliably terminates the subscriber process, resulting in a denial-of-service condition.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-30
UPDATED
Date2026-07-30
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8