Comparison Overview

Aultman Health Foundation

VS

Sutter Health

Aultman Health Foundation

2600 Sixth Street SW, Canton, Ohio, US, 44710
Last Update: 2025-12-29
Between 700 and 749

Serving Stark and surrounding counties since 1892, Aultman Health System is committed to our patients, employees, the community and medical education. Aultman offers high-quality health care services, and we continuously reinvest to improve our facilities and technology. We provide educational and career opportunities through area schools and improve the health of our community through The Aultman Foundation. We offer health and wellness education for our community. We have hundreds of dedicated volunteers who help us positively impact the community. With 1,032 beds, over 700 active physicians and a team of more than 7,000 employees, Aultman is Stark County's largest provider of health care services.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 3,212
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Sutter Health

2200 River Plaza Drive, None, Sacramento, California, US, 95833
Last Update: 2025-12-23
Between 650 and 699

Sutter Health is a not-for-profit, people-centered healthcare system providing comprehensive care throughout California. Sutter Health is committed to innovative, high-quality patient care and community partnerships, and innovative, high-quality patient care. Today, Sutter Health is pursuing a bold new plan to reach more people and make excellent healthcare more connected and accessible. The health system’s 57,000+ staff and clinicians and 12,000+ affiliated physicians currently serve more than 3 million patients with a focus on expanding opportunities to serve patients, people and communities better. Sutter Health provides exceptional, affordable care through its hospitals, medical groups, ambulatory surgery centers, urgent care clinics, telehealth, home health and hospice services. Dedicated to transforming healthcare, at Sutter Health, getting better never stops. Learn more about how Sutter Health is transforming healthcare at sutterhealth.org and vitals.sutterhealth.org.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 23,594
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aultman-health.jpeg
Aultman Health Foundation
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/sutter-health.jpeg
Sutter 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
Aultman Health Foundation
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Sutter Health
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

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

Aultman Health Foundation has 17.65% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Sutter Health has 17.65% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Aultman Health Foundation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Sutter Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aultman-health.jpeg
Aultman Health Foundation
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized third-party access
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/sutter-health.jpeg
Sutter Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Website Tracking Technologies (Pixels, Cookies, Web Beacons, JavaScript)
Motivation: Data Collection for Marketing/Third-Party Use
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Zero-day vulnerability in MOVEit Transfer programme
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Exploitation of MOVEit Transfer Server Vulnerability
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Sutter Health company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Aultman Health Foundation company.

In the current year, Sutter Health and Aultman Health Foundation have reported a similar number of cyber incidents.

Neither Sutter Health company nor Aultman Health Foundation company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Sutter Health company and Aultman Health Foundation company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither Sutter Health company nor Aultman Health Foundation company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation company nor Sutter Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation nor Sutter Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation company nor Sutter Health company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Sutter Health company employs more people globally than Aultman Health Foundation company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation nor Sutter Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation nor Sutter Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation nor Sutter Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation nor Sutter Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation nor Sutter Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Aultman Health Foundation nor Sutter Health holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper Input Validation vulnerability in qs (parse modules) allows HTTP DoS.This issue affects qs: < 6.14.1. SummaryThe arrayLimit option in qs does not enforce limits for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2), allowing attackers to cause denial-of-service via memory exhaustion. Applications using arrayLimit for DoS protection are vulnerable. DetailsThe arrayLimit option only checks limits for indexed notation (a[0]=1&a[1]=2) but completely bypasses it for bracket notation (a[]=1&a[]=2). Vulnerable code (lib/parse.js:159-162): if (root === '[]' && options.parseArrays) { obj = utils.combine([], leaf); // No arrayLimit check } Working code (lib/parse.js:175): else if (index <= options.arrayLimit) { // Limit checked here obj = []; obj[index] = leaf; } The bracket notation handler at line 159 uses utils.combine([], leaf) without validating against options.arrayLimit, while indexed notation at line 175 checks index <= options.arrayLimit before creating arrays. PoCTest 1 - Basic bypass: npm install qs const qs = require('qs'); const result = qs.parse('a[]=1&a[]=2&a[]=3&a[]=4&a[]=5&a[]=6', { arrayLimit: 5 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 6 (should be max 5) Test 2 - DoS demonstration: const qs = require('qs'); const attack = 'a[]=' + Array(10000).fill('x').join('&a[]='); const result = qs.parse(attack, { arrayLimit: 100 }); console.log(result.a.length); // Output: 10000 (should be max 100) Configuration: * arrayLimit: 5 (test 1) or arrayLimit: 100 (test 2) * Use bracket notation: a[]=value (not indexed a[0]=value) ImpactDenial of Service via memory exhaustion. Affects applications using qs.parse() with user-controlled input and arrayLimit for protection. Attack scenario: * Attacker sends HTTP request: GET /api/search?filters[]=x&filters[]=x&...&filters[]=x (100,000+ times) * Application parses with qs.parse(query, { arrayLimit: 100 }) * qs ignores limit, parses all 100,000 elements into array * Server memory exhausted → application crashes or becomes unresponsive * Service unavailable for all users Real-world impact: * Single malicious request can crash server * No authentication required * Easy to automate and scale * Affects any endpoint parsing query strings with bracket notation

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
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

A weakness has been identified in code-projects Refugee Food Management System 1.0. This affects an unknown part of the file /home/editfood.php. This manipulation of the argument a/b/c/d causes sql injection. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

A security flaw has been discovered in code-projects Refugee Food Management System 1.0. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file /home/editrefugee.php. The manipulation of the argument rfid results in sql injection. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be exploited.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

Authentication Bypass Using an Alternate Path or Channel vulnerability in Mobile Builder Mobile builder allows Authentication Abuse.This issue affects Mobile builder: from n/a through 1.4.2.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Improper Neutralization of Input During Web Page Generation ('Cross-site Scripting') vulnerability in Hiroaki Miyashita Custom Field Template allows Stored XSS.This issue affects Custom Field Template: from n/a through 2.7.5.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:L