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

Comparison Overview

The Craneware GroupThe Craneware Group
VS
St. Luke's University Health NetworkSt. Luke's University Health Network
The Craneware Group

The Craneware Group

600 W Hillsboro Blvd, Deerfield Beach, 33441, US

Last Update: 20/07/2026

View Profile
702/1000Moderate

For over 25 years, The Craneware Group has led healthcare financial and operational transformation with innovative technologies that drive measurable results. Our Trisus® cloud ecosystem integrates data, value cycle intelligence, and advanced analytics, helping healthca...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:779
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
St. Luke's University Health Network

St. Luke's University Health Network

801 Ostrum Street, Bethlehem, 18015, US

Last Update: 15/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.sluhn.org
778/1000Fair

Founded in 1872, St. Luke’s University Health Network (SLUHN) is a fully integrated, regional, non-profit network of more than 23,000 employees providing services at 16 campuses and 350+ outpatient sites. With annual net revenue of $4 billion, the Network’s service area...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:10,877
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
The Craneware Group

The Craneware Group

-
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
St. Luke's University Health Network

St. Luke's University Health Network

-
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)

The Craneware Group has 29.08% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for St. Luke's University Health Network in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - The Craneware Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Craneware Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - St. Luke's University Health Network (X = Date, Y = Severity)

St. Luke's University Health Network 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...
The Craneware Group

The Craneware Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
CRA1784535812
St. Luke's University Health Network

St. Luke's University Health Network

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-89096
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in nfs-utils. An unauthenticated remote attacker can trigger a Denial of Service (DoS) by sending repeated state notification requests to an exposed rpc.statd service. The service fails to properly release memory allocated during callback processing, leading to continuous memory growth. Sustained requests can exhaust system resources, eventually causing the service to degrade or crash.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
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
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-89088
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in parted. A heap-based buffer overflow exists in libparted's file system resizing logic when handling FAT16 volumes. By convincing a user or administrator to resize a specially crafted FAT16 file system image with malformed directory metadata, an attacker can trigger an oversized read into a fixed-size memory buffer. This issue causes memory corruption, resulting in an application crash and a denial of service (DoS).

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-89085
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in parted. A heap-based buffer overflow can occur when processing a specially crafted FAT32 filesystem due to an integer calculation error during buffer allocation. A local attacker could exploit this by enticing a user or automated service to open a malicious filesystem image, resulting in an application crash leading to a Denial of Service (DoS) or potential memory corruption.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-17591
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in libarchive. An attacker can cause a Denial of Service (DoS) or potential information disclosure due to a use-after-free vulnerability, which occurs when a program reads memory that has already been released. This issue arises when the archive_entry_copy_mac_metadata() function deallocates an internal buffer before completing a data copy. An attacker who can supply input to an application utilizing this function can trigger the flaw to crash the application or read uninitialized memory data.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.6
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
1
CVE-2026-111802
SUMMARY

A flaw was found in Nautilus. When a removable drive or disk image is unmounted or ejected, Nautilus prompts the user to empty the trash without verifying whether the trash directory paths are symbolic links. An attacker can exploit this flaw by tricking a user into mounting a crafted storage volume and confirming the prompt to empty the trash, leading to the arbitrary deletion of files accessible to that user.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-16
UPDATED
Date2026-10-16
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.6)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
1.3