Comparison Overview

Fred Hutch Patient Care

VS

Select Medical

Fred Hutch Patient Care

None
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

Please follow the main Fred Hutch page for future info/updates on Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. More info below.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 121
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Select Medical

4714 Gettysburg Rd, None, Mechanicsburg, PA, US, 17055
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Select Medical made a commitment more than 20 years ago to deliver an exceptional patient care experience that promotes healing and recovery in a compassionate environment. We have honored that promise by helping define the nation's standard of excellence in specialized hospital and rehabilitative care. Today, we have grown to more than 50,000 colleagues caring for more than 82,000 patients every day across our care continuum. Select Medical is one of the largest operators of critical illness recovery hospitals, rehabilitation hospitals, outpatient rehabilitation centers and occupational health centers in the United States. Select Medical and its parent company, Select Medical Holdings Corporation (NYSE: SEM), are based in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. We are honored to be recognized by Forbes as one of America’s Best-In-State Employers in Maryland, Missouri and Pennsylvania for 2021. Select Medical provides equal employment [and affirmative action] opportunities to applicants and employees without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, protected veteran status, or disability. http://careers.selectmedical.com

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 24,505
Subsidiaries: 35
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fred-hutch-patient-care.jpeg
Fred Hutch Patient Care
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/select-medical.jpeg
Select Medical
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
Fred Hutch Patient Care
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Select Medical
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 Fred Hutch Patient Care in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Select Medical in 2025.

Incident History — Fred Hutch Patient Care (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fred Hutch Patient Care cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Select Medical (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Select Medical cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fred-hutch-patient-care.jpeg
Fred Hutch Patient Care
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2023
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/select-medical.jpeg
Select Medical
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2024
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Select Medical company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Fred Hutch Patient Care company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Fred Hutch Patient Care and Select Medical have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Select Medical company and Fred Hutch Patient Care company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Select Medical company nor Fred Hutch Patient Care company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Select Medical company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Fred Hutch Patient Care company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Select Medical company nor Fred Hutch Patient Care company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Fred Hutch Patient Care company nor Select Medical company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Fred Hutch Patient Care nor Select Medical holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Select Medical company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Fred Hutch Patient Care company.

Select Medical company employs more people globally than Fred Hutch Patient Care company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Fred Hutch Patient Care nor Select Medical holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Fred Hutch Patient Care nor Select Medical holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Fred Hutch Patient Care nor Select Medical holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Fred Hutch Patient Care nor Select Medical holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Fred Hutch Patient Care nor Select Medical holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Fred Hutch Patient Care nor Select Medical 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