Comparison Overview
Co-operative and Experiential Education at University of Waterloo
Co-operative and Experiential Education at University of Waterloo
200 University Ave W, Waterloo, N2L 3G1, CA
Last Update: 27/02/2026
Co-operative education is synonymous with the University of Waterloo. It’s one of the innovations that the University was founded on more than 60 years ago. Today, our incomparable co-operative education program is the reason 70% of incoming undergraduate students choos...
University of California, San Francisco
530 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, California, US, 94122
Last Update: 01/04/2026
UC San Francisco is driven by the idea that when the best research, the best education and the best patient care converge, great breakthroughs are achieved. We pursue this integrated excellence with singular focus, fueled by collaboration among our top-ranked profession...
Compliance Ranges Comparison
Co-operative and Experiential Education at University of Waterloo
University of California, San Francisco
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Co-operative and Experiential Education at University of Waterloo in 2026.
Incidents vs Higher Education Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for University of California, San Francisco in 2026.
Incident History - Co-operative and Experiential Education at University of Waterloo (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Co-operative and Experiential Education at University of Waterloo cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - University of California, San Francisco (X = Date, Y = Severity)
University of California, San Francisco cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents
Co-operative and Experiential Education at University of Waterloo
University of California, San Francisco
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.
The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.
The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.
With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.
The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.