Comparison Overview

Amerigroup

VS

UNC Health

Amerigroup

4425 Corporation Lane, None, Virginia Beach, Virginia, US, 23462
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Amerigroup Community Care has served Georgia families since 2006 through our Medicaid insurance and other low-cost health coverage. With our experience and over 600,000 members, we understand what you want from a health plan and your Medicaid program. Let us help you get the most from your Georgia Medicaid health insurance, PeachCare for Kids, Planning for Healthy Babies, and Georgia Families 360°SM benefits. With all your regular benefits, plus extras just for our enrollees, we make getting to the doctor and living healthy a little easier. Let us help you make the most of your benefits.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 2,225
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

UNC Health

101 Manning Drive, Chapel Hill, 27516, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Our mission is to improve the health and well-being of North Carolinians and others whom we serve. We accomplish this by providing leadership and excellence in the interrelated areas of patient care, education and research. UNC Health and its 33,000 employees, continue to serve as North Carolina’s Health Care System, caring for patients from all 100 counties and beyond our borders. We continue to leverage the world class research conducted in the UNC School of Medicine, translating that innovation to life-saving and life-changing therapies, procedures, and techniques for the patients who rely on us. General terms of service for UNC Health social media: https://www.facebook.com/unchealthcare/about_details

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 19,216
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/amerigroup-corporation.jpeg
Amerigroup
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/unchealth.jpeg
UNC Health
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Amerigroup
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
UNC Health
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

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

No incidents recorded for Amerigroup in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for UNC Health in 2025.

Incident History — Amerigroup (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Amerigroup cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — UNC Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UNC Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/amerigroup-corporation.jpeg
Amerigroup
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2022
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/unchealth.jpeg
UNC Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 03/2017
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

UNC Health company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Amerigroup company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Amerigroup and UNC Health have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, UNC Health company and Amerigroup company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither UNC Health company nor Amerigroup company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both UNC Health company and Amerigroup company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither UNC Health company nor Amerigroup company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Amerigroup company nor UNC Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Amerigroup nor UNC Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

UNC Health company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Amerigroup company.

UNC Health company employs more people globally than Amerigroup company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Amerigroup nor UNC Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Amerigroup nor UNC Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Amerigroup nor UNC Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Amerigroup nor UNC Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Amerigroup nor UNC Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Amerigroup nor UNC Health holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H