Comparison Overview

CommonSpirit Health

VS

Jefferson Health

CommonSpirit Health

444 W Lake St, Chicago, Illinois, US, 60606-0097
Last Update: 2025-11-25

Inspired by faith. Driven by innovation. Powered by humankindness. CommonSpirit Health is building a healthier future for all through its integrated health services. As one of the nation’s largest nonprofit Catholic healthcare organizations, CommonSpirit Health delivers more than 20 million patient encounters annually through more than 2,300 clinics, care sites and 138 hospital-based locations, in addition to its home-based services and virtual care offerings. CommonSpirit has more than 160,000 employees, 45,000 nurses and 25,000 physicians and advanced practice providers across 24 states and contributes more than $5 billion annually in charity care, community benefits, and unreimbursed government programs. Together with our patients, physicians, partners, and communities, we are creating a more just, equitable, and innovative healthcare delivery system. Learn more at commonspirit.org.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 44,829
Subsidiaries: 9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
7
Attack type number
4

Jefferson Health

130 South Ninth Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, US
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

Thomas Jefferson University and Thomas Jefferson University Hospitals are partners in providing excellent clinical and compassionate care for our patients in the Philadelphia region, educating the health professionals of tomorrow in a variety of disciplines and discovering new knowledge that will define the future of clinical care. Thomas Jefferson University is dedicated to health sciences education and research.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 16,861
Subsidiaries: 15
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/commonspirithealth.jpeg
CommonSpirit 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/thomas-jefferson-university-hospitals.jpeg
Jefferson 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
CommonSpirit Health
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Jefferson Health
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 CommonSpirit Health in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Jefferson Health in 2025.

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

CommonSpirit Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Jefferson Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/commonspirithealth.jpeg
CommonSpirit Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2024
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2022
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 10/2022
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/thomas-jefferson-university-hospitals.jpeg
Jefferson Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 01/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access to Email Accounts
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 08/2020
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Email
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Jefferson Health company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to CommonSpirit Health company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

CommonSpirit Health company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Jefferson Health company.

In the current year, Jefferson Health company and CommonSpirit Health company have not reported any cyber incidents.

CommonSpirit Health company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Jefferson Health company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Jefferson Health company and CommonSpirit Health company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Both Jefferson Health company and CommonSpirit Health company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither CommonSpirit Health company nor Jefferson Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither CommonSpirit Health nor Jefferson Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Jefferson Health company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to CommonSpirit Health company.

CommonSpirit Health company employs more people globally than Jefferson Health company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither CommonSpirit Health nor Jefferson Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither CommonSpirit Health nor Jefferson Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither CommonSpirit Health nor Jefferson Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither CommonSpirit Health nor Jefferson Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither CommonSpirit Health nor Jefferson Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither CommonSpirit Health nor Jefferson 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