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

Comparison Overview

Dansk HovedpinecenterDansk Hovedpinecenter
VS
UPMCUPMC
Dansk Hovedpinecenter

Dansk Hovedpinecenter

Valdemar Hansens Vej 5, Glostrup, Glostrup, 2600, DK

Last Update: 30/12/2025

View Profile
760/1000Fair

​Dansk Hovedpinecenter er et højt specialiseret tværfagligt center på Rigshospitalet, Glostrup, der behandler patienter med meget svær hovedpine og migræne samt patienter med smerter i ansigtet.

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:35
Subsidiaries:20
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
UPMC

UPMC

US Steel Tower, Pittsburgh, 15219, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 550 and 599
http://www.upmc.com
587/1000Very Poor

UPMC is a world-renowned, nonprofit health care provider and insurer committed to delivering exceptional, people-centered care and community services. Headquartered in Pittsburgh and affiliated with the University of Pittsburgh Schools of the Health Sciences, UPMC is sh...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:42,506
Subsidiaries:8
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Dansk Hovedpinecenter

Dansk Hovedpinecenter

-
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
UPMC

UPMC

-
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 Dansk Hovedpinecenter in 2026.

Incidents

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

UPMC has 0.99% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Dansk Hovedpinecenter (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Dansk Hovedpinecenter 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 - UPMC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UPMC 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...
Dansk Hovedpinecenter

Dansk Hovedpinecenter

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
UPMC

UPMC

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
UPM1773786562
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
UPMNOR1773678972
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
UPM2344101122

FAQ

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