Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No ComparisonCatalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison
VS
LexisNexisLexisNexis
Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison

Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison

Katy , 77493, US

Last Update: 18/03/2026

View Profile
492/1000Critical

We are your Revenue Partner. Not Just A Billing Company. - If we could increase your revenue by 10%, is that worth 1 hour of your time? - Is transparency missing from the relationship with your current biller? - Are you absolutely confident you’re collecting every dolla...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:23
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
LexisNexis

LexisNexis

230 Park Avenue, New York City, 10017, US

Last Update: 23/06/2026

View Profile

LexisNexis is a leading innovator of private, secure, and authoritative Legal AI solutions that help legal and business professionals draft full documents with ease, make informed decisions faster, and deliver outstanding work and improved outcomes, all powered by trust...

NAICS:5415
NAICS Definition:Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees:10,705
Subsidiaries:72
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
6
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison

Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
LexisNexis

LexisNexis

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Avg (This Year)

LexisNexis has 188.46% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - LexisNexis (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LexisNexis cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison

Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
CAT1771961762
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
KORVANCAT1770667690
LexisNexis

LexisNexis

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
RELLEX1772562253
🔒 Incident : Breach
LEX1772555037
🔒 Incident : Breach
LEX1782211793

FAQ

Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison company and LexisNexis company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison and LexisNexis, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison and LexisNexis, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison or LexisNexis ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison or LexisNexis ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison and LexisNexis, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Catalyst RCM - Better Results. No Comparison and LexisNexis, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-63261
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) in Kibana can lead to denial of service via Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130). A low-privileged authenticated user can send a specially crafted request to a Kibana machine learning feature, causing the server to exhaust available memory and become unavailable to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63260
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Resource Consumption (CWE-400) in Kibana can lead to denial of service via Excessive Allocation (CAPEC-130). An authenticated attacker with low-privilege access can trigger a denial of service condition in Kibana by sending a specially crafted, oversized request payload. Processing this user-supplied input requires resource-intensive memory allocation that can exhaust the available heap memory in the Kibana process, causing it to crash and become unavailable to all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63259
SUMMARY

Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key (CWE-639) in Kibana can lead to information disclosure via user-supplied identifiers that reference scheduled query result data from Kibana Spaces the requester is not authorized to access.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63145
SUMMARY

Incorrect Authorization (CWE-863) in Kibana can lead to integrity compromise of Machine Learning audit and notification records via Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLs (CAPEC-1). A vulnerability exists in Kibana's Machine Learning functionality where a Machine Learning management endpoint performs an insufficient authorization check. The endpoint validates only a coarse privilege level but does not verify that the requesting user has access to the specific Machine Learning job or notification resources provided in the request. As a result, a low-privileged user with Machine Learning access in any Kibana space can manipulate Machine Learning audit and notification records for arbitrary jobs—including jobs in other spaces or belonging to other users—by leveraging Kibana's internally elevated credentials to write to restricted Machine Learning system indices that the user cannot access directly.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-63144
SUMMARY

Uncontrolled Recursion (CWE-674) in Elasticsearch can lead to denial of service via a specially crafted search request submitted by a low-privileged authenticated user. A user with read-level index access can submit a request that triggers unbounded recursive processing within the Elasticsearch query evaluation component, causing a fatal error that terminates the affected node. In single-node deployments, this results in complete service outage; in multi-node clusters, it causes repeated node restarts and sustained availability degradation.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-21
UPDATED
Date2026-07-21
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8