Comparison Overview
Advanced Medical Imaging

Advanced Medical Imaging
2008 W Boulevard St, Kokomo, Indiana, 46902, US
Last Update: 11/03/2026
Advanced Medical Imaging is a multi-service imaging center, dedicated to providing consistent, quality outpatient imaging services, with a deep commitment to customer service and patient care. Our professionally trained and registered Technologists are focused on servin...

Mayo Clinic
200 First St. S.W., Rochester, 55905, US
Last Update: 13/09/2026
Mayo Clinic has expanded and changed in many ways, but our values remain true to the vision of our founders. Our primary value – The needs of the patient come first – guides our plans and decisions as we create the future of health care. Join us and you'll find a cultur...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Advanced Medical Imaging







Mayo Clinic






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Advanced Medical Imaging in 2026.
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
Mayo Clinic has 98.02% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Advanced Medical Imaging (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Advanced Medical Imaging cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Mayo Clinic (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Mayo Clinic cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Advanced Medical Imaging

Mayo Clinic
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.