Comparison Overview
ATI Physical Therapy

ATI Physical Therapy
2001 Butterfield Rd, Downers Grove, 60515, US
Last Update: 02/04/2026
With over 30 years’ experience and approximately 850 locations nationwide, ATI Physical Therapy prides itself on being at the forefront of patient care and customer service for the physical therapy industry. How do we do this? Through our dedication to ongoing research,...

Smart Fit
Avenida Paulista 1294, São Paulo, BR
Last Update: 01/04/2026
Somos o Grupo Smart Fit, a força que ativa o seu potencial. Um ecossistema em constante evolução que une tecnologia, propósito e performance para transformar o fitness, e a vida das pessoas, em movimento real. Com mais de 22 mil colaboradores e colaboradoras em 16 país...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

ATI Physical Therapy







Smart Fit






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Wellness and Fitness Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for ATI Physical Therapy in 2026.
Incidents vs Wellness and Fitness Services Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Smart Fit in 2026.
Incident History - ATI Physical Therapy (X = Date, Y = Severity)
ATI Physical Therapy cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Smart Fit (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Smart Fit cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

ATI Physical Therapy

Smart Fit
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
The GOOSE subscriber component improperly validates the UTC timestamp field in unauthenticated IEC 61850 GOOSE (EtherType 0x88B8) Layer-2 multicast messages. A specially crafted GOOSE frame containing an undersized timestamp field can trigger a heap out-of-bounds read during message processing, causing the process to crash and resulting in a denial-of-service condition.
OpenClaw Dashboard contains a stored cross-site scripting vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the administrator's browser session by injecting HTML markup into agent transcript messages processed through the sessions API. Attackers can craft a message containing inline event handler payloads such as an img tag with an onerror attribute within the 60-character rendering budget, which is stored in the session transcript and interpolated unsanitized into innerHTML on the default landing page, allowing theft of session tokens and unauthorized calls to authenticated administrative endpoints including agent instruction file modification.
MeshCentral 1.1.21 contains a cross-site WebSocket hijacking protection bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated remote attackers to hijack authenticated administrator sessions by exploiting an unconditional early return in the CheckWebServerOriginName() function within webserver.js when self-signed certificates are in use. Attackers can open cross-origin WebSocket connections to any of the twelve WebSocket endpoints, send crafted action commands to exfiltrate the server sessionKey used to sign session cookies, forge session tokens as arbitrary users, and gain full remote control of all managed devices governed by the MeshCentral instance.
The GOOSE parser contains an off-by-one boundary-handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer-2 multicast frame on the process bus. When specific GOOSE message fields are processed, the parser advances its internal buffer position incorrectly, resulting in a heap out-of-bounds read. On affected platforms, this condition reliably terminates the subscriber process and causes a denial-of-service.
The GOOSE payload parser contains a boundary handling flaw that can be triggered by a single unauthenticated Layer 2 multicast frame on the process bus. When processing specific payload fields, an attacker controlled inner element length may exceed its enclosing length, causing the parser to over read by one byte. This out-of-bounds read reliably terminates the subscriber process, resulting in a denial-of-service condition.