Comparison Overview

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

VS

Mass General Brigham

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

330 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, US, 02215
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) is part of Beth Israel Lahey Health, a new health care system that brings together academic medical centers and teaching hospitals, community and specialty hospitals, more than 4,000 physicians and 35,000 employees in a shared mission to expand access to great care and advance the science and practice of medicine through groundbreaking research and education. BIDMC is a world-class teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School and is located in the heart of Boston. We are passionate about caring for our patients like they are family, finding new cures, using the finest and the latest technologies, and teaching and inspiring caregivers of tomorrow. We put people at the center of everything we do, because we believe in medicine that puts people first. Interested in a career at BIDMC? Check out www.jobs.bidmc.org.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,690
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Mass General Brigham

399 Revolution Dr, None, Somerville, Massachusetts, US, 02145
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Mass General Brigham is an integrated academic health care system, uniting great minds to solve the hardest problems in medicine for our communities and the world. Mass General Brigham connects a full continuum of care across a system of academic medical centers, community and specialty hospitals, a health insurance plan, physician networks, community health centers, home care, and long-term care services. Mass General Brigham is a nonprofit organization that is committed to patient care, research, teaching, and service to the community. In addition, Mass General Brigham is one of the nation’s leading biomedical research organizations and a principal teaching affiliate of Harvard Medical School.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,655
Subsidiaries: 10
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/beth-israel-deaconess-medical-center.jpeg
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
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/mass-general-brigham.jpeg
Mass General Brigham
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
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Mass General Brigham
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 Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Mass General Brigham in 2025.

Incident History — Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Mass General Brigham (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mass General Brigham cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/beth-israel-deaconess-medical-center.jpeg
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mass-general-brigham.jpeg
Mass General Brigham
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2023
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Human Error
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Mass General Brigham company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Mass General Brigham company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company has not reported any.

In the current year, Mass General Brigham company and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Mass General Brigham company nor Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Mass General Brigham company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Mass General Brigham company nor Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company nor Mass General Brigham company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center nor Mass General Brigham holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Mass General Brigham company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company.

Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center company employs more people globally than Mass General Brigham company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center nor Mass General Brigham holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center nor Mass General Brigham holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center nor Mass General Brigham holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center nor Mass General Brigham holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center nor Mass General Brigham holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center nor Mass General Brigham 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