Comparison Overview

Geisinger

VS

The Cigna Group

Geisinger

100 North Academy Avenue, Danville, Pa., US, 17822
Last Update: 2026-01-23
Between 600 and 649

Geisinger is among the nation’s leading providers of value-based care, serving 1.2 million people in urban and rural communities across Pennsylvania. Founded in 1915 by philanthropist Abigail Geisinger, the nonprofit system generates $10 billion in annual revenues across 126 care sites — including 10 hospital campuses — and Geisinger Health Plan, with more than half a million members in commercial and government plans. Geisinger College of Health Sciences educates more than 5,000 medical professionals annually and conducts more than 1,400 clinical research studies. With 26,000 employees, including 1,700 employed physicians, Geisinger is among Pennsylvania’s largest employers with an estimated economic impact of $15 billion to the state’s economy. On March 31, 2024, Geisinger became the first member of Risant Health, a new nonprofit charitable organization created to expand and accelerate value-based care across the country. For more information, visit geisinger.org/careers or connect with us on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and Twitter.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 15,511
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
2

The Cigna Group

900 Cottage Grove Rd, Bloomfield, 06002, US
Last Update: 2026-01-21

The Cigna Group is a global health company committed to creating a better future built on the vitality of every individual and every community. We relentlessly challenge ourselves to partner and innovate solutions for better health. The Cigna Group includes products and services marketed under Cigna Healthcare, Evernorth Health Services or its subsidiaries. The Cigna Group maintains sales capabilities in more than 30 countries and jurisdictions, and has more than 190 million customer relationships around the world.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 21,598
Subsidiaries: 13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/geisinger.jpeg
Geisinger
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/the-cigna-group.jpeg
The Cigna Group
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
Geisinger
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
The Cigna Group
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 Geisinger in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for The Cigna Group in 2026.

Incident History — Geisinger (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Geisinger cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — The Cigna Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Cigna Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/geisinger.jpeg
Geisinger
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Initial Access Broker
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 11/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: insider threat, privilege abuse
Motivation: unauthorized data access, potential financial gain (unconfirmed), malicious intent
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Insider Access (Former Employee)
Motivation: Financial Gain, Unauthorized Data Access
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/the-cigna-group.jpeg
The Cigna Group
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Third-party vendor compromise
Motivation: Data exfiltration
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2019
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Inadvertent Disclosure
Blog: Blog

FAQ

The Cigna Group company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Geisinger company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Geisinger and The Cigna Group have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, The Cigna Group company and Geisinger company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither The Cigna Group company nor Geisinger company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both The Cigna Group company and Geisinger company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Geisinger company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while The Cigna Group company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Geisinger company nor The Cigna Group company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Geisinger nor The Cigna Group holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

The Cigna Group company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Geisinger company.

The Cigna Group company employs more people globally than Geisinger company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Geisinger nor The Cigna Group holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Geisinger nor The Cigna Group holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Geisinger nor The Cigna Group holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Geisinger nor The Cigna Group holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Geisinger nor The Cigna Group holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Geisinger nor The Cigna Group holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Improper validation of specified type of input in M365 Copilot allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Improper access control in Azure Front Door (AFD) allows an unauthorized attacker to elevate privileges over a network.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Azure Entra ID Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
Description

Moonraker is a Python web server providing API access to Klipper 3D printing firmware. In versions 0.9.3 and below, instances configured with the "ldap" component enabled are vulnerable to LDAP search filter injection techniques via the login endpoint. The 401 error response message can be used to determine whether or not a search was successful, allowing for brute force methods to discover LDAP entries on the server such as user IDs and user attributes. This issue has been fixed in version 0.10.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 2.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:U/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

Runtipi is a Docker-based, personal homeserver orchestrator that facilitates multiple services on a single server. Versions 3.7.0 and above allow an authenticated user to execute arbitrary system commands on the host server by injecting shell metacharacters into backup filenames. The BackupManager fails to sanitize the filenames of uploaded backups. The system persists user-uploaded files directly to the host filesystem using the raw originalname provided in the request. This allows an attacker to stage a file containing shell metacharacters (e.g., $(id).tar.gz) at a predictable path, which is later referenced during the restore process. The successful storage of the file is what allows the subsequent restore command to reference and execute it. This issue has been fixed in version 4.7.0.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H