Comparison Overview

Bon Secours

VS

Mayo Clinic

Bon Secours

1505 Marriottsville Road, Marriottsville, Maryland, US, 21104
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

Bon Secours Health System, Inc. based in Marriottsville, Maryland, is a $3.2 billion dollar not-for-profit Catholic health system that owns, manages or joint ventures 18 acute care, 5 long term care, 4 assisted living, 6 retirement communities/senior housing, 14 home care and hospice services, and other facilities, primarily on the East Coast. Bon Secours Health System consists of more than 24,000 caregivers helping people in seven states. Its vision is to be a prophetic Catholic health ministry partnering with communities to create a more humane world, build health and social justice and provide exceptional value for those served.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 9,938
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Mayo Clinic

200 First St. S.W., None, Rochester, Minnesota, US, 55905
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 800 and 849

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 culture of teamwork, professionalism and mutual respect, and most importantly, a life-changing career. Mayo Clinic was founded in Rochester, Minnesota by brothers Dr. William James Mayo and Dr. Charles Horace Mayo. More than 100 years later, their vision continues to evolve around a single guiding value: "The needs of the patient come first." Today we are the largest integrated, not for-profit medical group practice in the world. We are recognized for high-quality patient care more than any other academic medical center in the nation. These endorsements are very gratifying, but also humbling. They remind us of the tradition that has been entrusted to each one of us, and the legacy of excellence that we uphold every day.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 46,331
Subsidiaries: 9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bon-secours-health-system.jpeg
Bon Secours
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/mayo-clinic.jpeg
Mayo Clinic
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
Bon Secours
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Mayo Clinic
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 Bon Secours in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Mayo Clinic in 2025.

Incident History — Bon Secours (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bon Secours 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

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bon-secours-health-system.jpeg
Bon Secours
Incidents

Date Detected: 08/2016
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2016
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Inadvertent Exposure (Misconfigured Internet-Accessible Files)
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mayo-clinic.jpeg
Mayo Clinic
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Mayo Clinic company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Bon Secours company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Bon Secours company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Mayo Clinic company has not reported any.

In the current year, Mayo Clinic company and Bon Secours company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Mayo Clinic company nor Bon Secours company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Bon Secours company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Mayo Clinic company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Mayo Clinic company nor Bon Secours company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Bon Secours company nor Mayo Clinic company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Bon Secours nor Mayo Clinic holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Mayo Clinic company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Bon Secours company.

Mayo Clinic company employs more people globally than Bon Secours company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Bon Secours nor Mayo Clinic holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Bon Secours nor Mayo Clinic holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Bon Secours nor Mayo Clinic holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Bon Secours nor Mayo Clinic holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Bon Secours nor Mayo Clinic holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Bon Secours nor Mayo Clinic 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