Comparison Overview

Chesapeake Regional Healthcare

VS

University of Maryland Medical System

Chesapeake Regional Healthcare

736 Battlefield Boulevard, North, Chesapeake, VA, US, 23320
Last Update: 2025-12-17

Chesapeake Regional Healthcare is a health system laser focused on innovation, known for making medical history in the region and providing patients with truly personal care. It’s hospital, Chesapeake Regional Medical Center, is the only independent, community-based hospital in Hampton Roads. With the best heart attack survival rates of the major systems in the region (risk adjusted), a nationally accredited Chest Pain Center, and open-heart surgical care coming in 2024. The system has a state-of-the-art neurointerventional suite, comprehensive cancer care, the most preferred Labor & Delivery program in the area, nearly 40 practice locations and approximately 600 physicians on staff. Chesapeake Regional Healthcare’s technologically advanced health care saves lives every day. Learn more at ChesapeakeRegional.com.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 1,318
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

University of Maryland Medical System

22 S. Greene St, Baltimore, MD, US, 21201
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

The University of Maryland Medical System (UMMS) was created in 1984 when the state-owned University Hospital became a private, nonprofit organization. It has evolved into a multi-hospital system with academic, community and specialty service missions reaching every part of the state and beyond. UMMS is a national and regional referral center for trauma, cancer care, neurocare, cardiac care, women's and children's health and physical rehabilitation. It also has one of the world's largest kidney transplant programs, as well as scores of other programs that improve the physical and mental health of thousands of people daily. The hospitals and health systems that comprise UMMS are: University of Maryland Medical Center University of Maryland Medical Center Midtown Campus UM Rehabilitation and Orthopaedic Institute UM Baltimore Washington Medical Center UM Capital Region Health UM Charles Regional Medical Center UM St. Joseph Medical Center UM Upper Chesapeake Health UM Shore Regional Health Mt. Washington Pediatric Hospital UM Community Medical Group

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,262
Subsidiaries: 2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chesapeake-regional-medical-center.jpeg
Chesapeake Regional Healthcare
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/ummedicalsystem.jpeg
University of Maryland Medical System
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
Chesapeake Regional Healthcare
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
University of Maryland Medical System
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 Chesapeake Regional Healthcare in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for University of Maryland Medical System in 2025.

Incident History — Chesapeake Regional Healthcare (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Chesapeake Regional Healthcare cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — University of Maryland Medical System (X = Date, Y = Severity)

University of Maryland Medical System cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/chesapeake-regional-medical-center.jpeg
Chesapeake Regional Healthcare
Incidents

Date Detected: 05/2023
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2015
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Physical Theft
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ummedicalsystem.jpeg
University of Maryland Medical System
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

University of Maryland Medical System company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas University of Maryland Medical System company has not reported any.

In the current year, University of Maryland Medical System company and Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither University of Maryland Medical System company nor Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither University of Maryland Medical System company nor Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither University of Maryland Medical System company nor Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company nor University of Maryland Medical System company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Chesapeake Regional Healthcare nor University of Maryland Medical System holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

University of Maryland Medical System company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company.

University of Maryland Medical System company employs more people globally than Chesapeake Regional Healthcare company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Chesapeake Regional Healthcare nor University of Maryland Medical System holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Chesapeake Regional Healthcare nor University of Maryland Medical System holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Chesapeake Regional Healthcare nor University of Maryland Medical System holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Chesapeake Regional Healthcare nor University of Maryland Medical System holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Chesapeake Regional Healthcare nor University of Maryland Medical System holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Chesapeake Regional Healthcare nor University of Maryland Medical System holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Nagios XI versions prior to 2026R1.1 are vulnerable to local privilege escalation due to an unsafe interaction between sudo permissions and application file permissions. A user‑accessible maintenance script may be executed as root via sudo and includes an application file that is writable by a lower‑privileged user. A local attacker with access to the application account can modify this file to introduce malicious code, which is then executed with elevated privileges when the script is run. Successful exploitation results in arbitrary code execution as the root user.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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

Out of bounds read and write in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 143.0.7499.147 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Description

Use after free in WebGPU in Google Chrome prior to 143.0.7499.147 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Description

SIPGO is a library for writing SIP services in the GO language. Starting in version 0.3.0 and prior to version 1.0.0-alpha-1, a nil pointer dereference vulnerability is in the SIPGO library's `NewResponseFromRequest` function that affects all normal SIP operations. The vulnerability allows remote attackers to crash any SIP application by sending a single malformed SIP request without a To header. The vulnerability occurs when SIP message parsing succeeds for a request missing the To header, but the response creation code assumes the To header exists without proper nil checks. This affects routine operations like call setup, authentication, and message handling - not just error cases. This vulnerability affects all SIP applications using the sipgo library, not just specific configurations or edge cases, as long as they make use of the `NewResponseFromRequest` function. Version 1.0.0-alpha-1 contains a patch for the issue.

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

GLPI is a free asset and IT management software package. Starting in version 9.1.0 and prior to version 10.0.21, an unauthorized user with an API access can read all knowledge base entries. Users should upgrade to 10.0.21 to receive a patch.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N