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

Comparison Overview

23andMe23andMe
VS
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)
23andMe

23andMe

Palo Alto, US

Last Update: 02/06/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
https://www.23andme.com
100/1000Critical

23andMe Research Institute is a nonprofit medical research organization that enables people everywhere to access their genetic information, learn about themselves and participate in the world's largest crowdsourced research initiative. The Institute aims to be the world...

NAICS:8135
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:559
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
8
Attack type number
1
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

Rte de Ferney 140, 1202 Genève, Geneva, GE, CH, 1202

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.msf.org
806/1000Good

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) is an international, independent, medical humanitarian organisation working to provide medical assistance to people affected by conflict, epidemics, disasters, or exclusion from healthcare. Since our founding in 1971, we’ve grown to a gl...

NAICS:8135
NAICS Definition:Others
Employees:28,997
Subsidiaries:35
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
23andMe

23andMe

-
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
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

-
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 Non-profit Organizations Industry Avg (This Year)

23andMe has 34.21% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Non-profit Organizations Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - 23andMe (X = Date, Y = Severity)

23andMe cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) 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...
23andMe

23andMe

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
23A1780359968
🔒 Incident : Breach
23A1764346412
🔒 Incident : Breach
23A0702607092625
Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between 23andMe company and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between 23andMe and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between 23andMe and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - 23andMe or Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - 23andMe or Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) ?
Between 23andMe and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between 23andMe and Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2