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

Comparison Overview

Cigna HealthcareCigna Healthcare
VS
Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HPGreater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP
Cigna Healthcare

Cigna Healthcare

900 Cottage Grove Road, Bloomfield, 06002, US

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.cigna.com
806/1000Good

We are a health benefits provider that advocates for better health through every stage of life. We guide our customers through the health care system, empowering them with the information and insight they need to improve their health and vitality.

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:29,635
Subsidiaries:3
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP

Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP

55, Boulevard Diderot, Paris, 75012, FR

Last Update: 11/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.aphp.fr
796/1000Fair

AP-HP (Greater Paris University Hospitals) is a European world-renowned university hospital. Its 39 hospitals treat 8 million people every year: in consultation, emergency, during scheduled or home hospitalizations. The AP-HP provides a public health service for everyo...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:37,495
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Cigna Healthcare

Cigna Healthcare

-
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
Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP

Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP

-
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 Cigna Healthcare in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Cigna Healthcare (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cigna Healthcare cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Cigna Healthcare

Cigna Healthcare

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
CIG353071725
Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP

Greater Paris University Hospitals - AP-HP

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-110873
SUMMARY

Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110872
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-110871
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
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
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-110870
SUMMARY

Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
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:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-110869
SUMMARY

Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-14
UPDATED
Date2026-10-14
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: 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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9