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

Comparison Overview

Franziskus Hospital BielefeldFranziskus Hospital Bielefeld
VS
Mayo ClinicMayo Clinic
Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld

Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld

Kiskerstraße 26, Bielefeld, 33615, DE

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.franziskus.de
700/1000Moderate

Das Franziskus Hospital in Bielefeld ist ein innovatives Unternehmen im Gesundheitswesen und gehört zusammen mit dem Sank Elisabeth Hospital in Gütersloh, dem Mathilden Hospital in Herford, dem Sankt Vinzenz Hospital in Rheda-Wiedenbrück, dem Marienhospital in Oelde und...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:58
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

200 First St. S.W., Rochester, 55905, US

Last Update: 08/06/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.mayoclinic.org
718/1000Moderate

Mayo Clinic has expanded and changed in many ways, but our values remain true to the vision of our founders. Our primary value – The needs of the patient come first – guides our plans and decisions as we create the future of health care. Join us and you'll find a cultur...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:48,983
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld

Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld

-
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
Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

-
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 Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld in 2026.

Incidents

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

Mayo Clinic has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Mayo Clinic (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mayo Clinic 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...
Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld

Franziskus Hospital Bielefeld

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
FRA192328124
Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
MAYSOLHONBAS1770310511
🔒 Incident : Breach
XSOHONADVMAY1780958028

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-85456
SUMMARY

MOOS-IvP through 24.8.1 fails to properly validate variable names extracted from alog files in the SplitHandler, allowing attackers to write files outside the split directory. Attackers can supply crafted alog files with backslash sequences in variable names to escape the output directory and append to arbitrary files on Windows systems.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-03
UPDATED
Date2026-09-03
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:H/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:H/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
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-85455
SUMMARY

MOOS core-moos through 10.4.0 contains a buffer over-read vulnerability in CMOOSCommPkt where a four-byte packet triggers out-of-bounds memory access during deserialization. Attackers can open a TCP connection to the MOOSDB port and send a crafted short packet to read memory before authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-03
UPDATED
Date2026-09-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/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
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-85454
SUMMARY

MOOS core-moos through 10.4.0 contains a buffer overflow vulnerability in CMOOSSerialPort::GetTelegram() that writes a NUL terminator one byte past the serial telegram stack buffer. Attackers controlling the serial line can send a full-length telegram to trigger the off-by-one write, corrupting the stack and potentially enabling code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-03
UPDATED
Date2026-09-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
0.9
CVE-2026-85453
SUMMARY

MOOS core-moos through 10.4.0 fails to escape database contents when rendering MOOSDB HTTP pages, allowing attackers to inject malicious scripts. Any MOOS publisher can set variable values containing script payloads that execute in the browser of operators viewing the web interface.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-03
UPDATED
Date2026-09-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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
2.7
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-85452
SUMMARY

MOOS ui-moos through 50b9c6c contains a buffer overflow vulnerability in ScopeTabPane.cpp and ScopeGrid.cpp where client and variable names are formatted into fixed 1024-byte buffers using sprintf without length validation. Attackers can supply arbitrarily long MOOS identifiers that overflow the buffers when an operator selects process list entries or pokes variables, enabling code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-03
UPDATED
Date2026-09-03
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8