Comparison Overview

Breast Cancer Alliance

VS

Hunter Health

Breast Cancer Alliance

None
Last Update: 2025-11-21

The mission of Breast Cancer Alliance is to improve survival rates and quality of life for those impacted by breast cancer through better prevention, early detection, treatment and cure. To promote these goals, we invest in innovative research, breast surgery fellowships, regional education, dignified support and screening for the uninsured and underserved.

NAICS: 923
NAICS Definition: Administration of Human Resource Programs
Employees: 15
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Hunter Health

2318 E Central Ave, None, Wichita, Kansas, US, None
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 650 and 699

Hunter Health is a full-service healthcare provider addressing the needs of our patients through medical, dental, behavioral health and health education services. Hunter Health has been offering affordable care to members of Sedgwick County and the surrounding communities since 1976. Hunter Health is the oldest Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in Wichita, and the only Urban Indian Health Program in the state. We aim to make healthcare a better system for everyone, especially you and the people you love. We provide patient-centered services, meaning we care about each of our patients individually, and offer a tailored treatment plan that best fits their lifestyle and goals. We offer extended hours, same day appointments and provide instruction on how to meet your health care needs when our office is not open, giving you 24-hour access to medical care.

NAICS: 923
NAICS Definition: Administration of Human Resource Programs
Employees: 131
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/breast-cancer-alliance.jpeg
Breast Cancer Alliance
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/hunter-health-clinic.jpeg
Hunter 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
Breast Cancer Alliance
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Hunter Health
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Health and Human Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Breast Cancer Alliance in 2025.

Incidents vs Health and Human Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hunter Health in 2025.

Incident History — Breast Cancer Alliance (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Breast Cancer Alliance cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Hunter Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/breast-cancer-alliance.jpeg
Breast Cancer Alliance
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hunter-health-clinic.jpeg
Hunter Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 9/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Email Account Compromise
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Breast Cancer Alliance company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Hunter Health company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Hunter Health company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Breast Cancer Alliance company has not reported any.

In the current year, Hunter Health company and Breast Cancer Alliance company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Hunter Health company nor Breast Cancer Alliance company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Hunter Health company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Breast Cancer Alliance company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Hunter Health company nor Breast Cancer Alliance company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance company nor Hunter Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance nor Hunter Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance company nor Hunter Health company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Hunter Health company employs more people globally than Breast Cancer Alliance company, reflecting its scale as a Health and Human Services.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance nor Hunter Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance nor Hunter Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance nor Hunter Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance nor Hunter Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance nor Hunter Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Breast Cancer Alliance nor Hunter Health 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