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

Comparison Overview

Anne Arundel County Department of HealthAnne Arundel County Department of Health
VS
Johnson & JohnsonJohnson & Johnson
Anne Arundel County Department of Health

Anne Arundel County Department of Health

N/A

Last Update: 03/04/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
https://AAHealth.org
686/1000Weak

The Department of Health, established October 1930, is the sole government agency responsible for improving the health of Anne Arundel County. By State and County authority, the Department of Health is charged with enforcement of certain federal, State and County laws a...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:298
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Johnson & Johnson

Johnson & Johnson

New Brunswick, NJ, US, 08903

Last Update: 28/06/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.jnj.com
778/1000Fair

At Johnson & Johnson, we believe health is everything. Our strength in healthcare innovation empowers us to build a world where complex diseases are prevented, treated, and cured, where treatments are smarter and less invasive, and solutions are personal. Through our ex...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:118,425
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Anne Arundel County Department of Health

Anne Arundel County Department of Health

-
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
Johnson & Johnson

Johnson & Johnson

-
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 Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Anne Arundel County Department of Health in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)

Johnson & Johnson has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Anne Arundel County Department of Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Anne Arundel County Department of Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Johnson & Johnson (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Johnson & Johnson 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...
Anne Arundel County Department of Health

Anne Arundel County Department of Health

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
AAH5182551120125
Johnson & Johnson

Johnson & Johnson

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
ERIDEFJOHROLVID1772180734
🔒 Incident : Breach
JOHROLERI1772202424
🔒 Incident : Breach
JOH333071125

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-74250
SUMMARY

In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-74247
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-74245
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74244
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-74243
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-14
UPDATED
Date2026-08-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9