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

Comparison Overview

Charlotte Hungerford HospitalCharlotte Hungerford Hospital
VS
CencoraCencora
Charlotte Hungerford Hospital

Charlotte Hungerford Hospital

540 Litchfield Street, Torrington, 06790, US

Last Update: 22/05/2026

View Profile
764/1000Fair

Charlotte Hungerford Hospital is a 109 bed, general acute care hospital located in Torrington, Connecticut, that serves as a regional health care resource for 100,000 residents of Litchfield County and Northwest Connecticut. CHH offers personalized attention from an exp...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:497
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Cencora

Cencora

N/A

Last Update: 07/05/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.cencora.com/
744/1000Moderate

Cencora, a company building on the legacy of AmerisourceBergen, is a leading global pharmaceutical solutions organization centered on improving the lives of people and animals around the world. We connect manufacturers, providers, and patients to ensure that anyone can ...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:27,718
Subsidiaries:19
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Charlotte Hungerford Hospital

Charlotte Hungerford Hospital

-
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
Cencora

Cencora

-
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 Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Charlotte Hungerford Hospital in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Cencora in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Charlotte Hungerford Hospital (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Charlotte Hungerford Hospital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

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

Cencora 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...
Charlotte Hungerford Hospital

Charlotte Hungerford Hospital

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Cencora

Cencora

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
INOCEN1775802306
🔒 Incident : Breach
CEN2702127093025

FAQ

Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital company and Cencora company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital and Cencora, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital and Cencora, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Charlotte Hungerford Hospital or Cencora ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Charlotte Hungerford Hospital or Cencora ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital and Cencora, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Charlotte Hungerford Hospital and Cencora, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1