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

Comparison Overview

Hamaspik Choice, MLTCHamaspik Choice, MLTC
VS
UT Southwestern Medical CenterUT Southwestern Medical Center
Hamaspik Choice, MLTC

Hamaspik Choice, MLTC

58 RT-59, Monsey, New York, US, 10952

Last Update: 23/09/2026

View Profile
684/1000Weak

Hamaspik Choice is a Managed Long Term Care Plan (MLTCP) contracted with the State of New York to provide members with a variety of healthcare services. Hamaspik Choice will strive to provide a top patient satisfaction rating. Featuring professionals with years of healt...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:147
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
UT Southwestern Medical Center

UT Southwestern Medical Center

5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, Texas, US, 75390

Last Update: 02/09/2026

View Profile
786/1000Fair

UT Southwestern is an academic medical center, world-renowned for its research, regarded among the best in the country for medical education and for clinical and scientific training, and nationally recognized for the quality of care its faculty provides to patients at U...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:18,678
Subsidiaries:13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Hamaspik Choice, MLTC

Hamaspik Choice, MLTC

-
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
UT Southwestern Medical Center

UT Southwestern Medical Center

-
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)

Hamaspik Choice, MLTC has 29.58% fewer incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for UT Southwestern Medical Center in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Hamaspik Choice, MLTC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Hamaspik Choice, MLTC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - UT Southwestern Medical Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UT Southwestern Medical Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Hamaspik Choice, MLTC

Hamaspik Choice, MLTC

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
HAM1790181427
UT Southwestern Medical Center

UT Southwestern Medical Center

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-96284
SUMMARY

A malicious user can get read-access to files in the flatpak-system-helper context if a system OCI repository is configured, because the OCI code paths in the system helper follow symlinks when importing OCI images that are under the user's control.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-27
UPDATED
Date2026-09-27
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.5
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1
CVE-2026-100886
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was identified in Seetong T8108, T8108P, T8116 and T8232 4.6.1.4-build202604241011. The affected element is an unknown function of the component Debug Service. Such manipulation leads to improper authentication. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-27
UPDATED
Date2026-09-27
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS2
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:P/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
6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-100885
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was found in Krayin laravel-crm up to 2.2.4. This affects an unknown function of the file packages/Webkul/Installer/src/Http/Middleware/CanInstall.php of the component admin-config-setup API Endpoint. The manipulation results in authorization bypass. The attack may be launched remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. Upgrading to version 2.2.5 mitigates this issue. The patch is identified as 89f2916b6a46ff91bd1999ce38158fa0de8b9490. Upgrading the affected component is recommended.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-27
UPDATED
Date2026-09-27
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 5.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-100884
SUMMARY

A vulnerability has been found in Krayin laravel-crm up to 2.2.5. The impacted element is the function Storage::download of the file packages/Webkul/Admin/src/Config/acl.php of the component attachment-download Endpoint. The manipulation of the argument ID leads to improper control of resource identifiers. The attack may be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. Upgrading to version 2.2.6 is sufficient to resolve this issue. The identifier of the patch is 13d6988cda8d69ece45ee1890effc90a7f21cdc1. It is suggested to upgrade the affected component.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-27
UPDATED
Date2026-09-27
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 4.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 4.0
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:N/A:N
CVSS3
Base Score: 4.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-100883
SUMMARY

A flaw has been found in Krayin laravel-crm up to 2.2.5. The affected element is an unknown function of the file packages/Webkul/Admin/src/Config/acl.php. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper access controls. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been published and may be used. Upgrading to version 2.2.6 is sufficient to fix this issue. This patch is called a399404a388d8ad2700a01349d0d98069c8e85a4. The affected component should be upgraded.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-27
UPDATED
Date2026-09-27
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8