Comparison Overview
El Centro de Corazón

El Centro de Corazón
7037 Capitol St., Ste. N100, Houston, 77011, US
Last Update: 16/03/2026
Serving Houston’s East End community since 1994, El Centro de Corazón (El Centro) is an accomplished Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) with two health center locations. El Centro offers a comprehensive range of healthcare services for the underserved, uninsured, ...

Duke University Health System
2301 Erwin Road, Durham, 27710, US
Last Update: 31/03/2026
As a world-class academic and health care system, Duke Health strives to transform medicine and health locally and globally through innovative scientific research, rapid translation of breakthrough discoveries, educating future clinical and scientific leaders, advocatin...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

El Centro de Corazón







Duke University Health System






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
El Centro de Corazón has 29.58% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Duke University Health System in 2026.
Incident History - El Centro de Corazón (X = Date, Y = Severity)
El Centro de Corazón cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Duke University Health System (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Duke University Health System cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

El Centro de Corazón

Duke University Health System
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.
The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.
ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.