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

Comparison Overview

Health Support Services (WA health system)Health Support Services (WA health system)
VS
PhilipsPhilips
Health Support Services (WA health system)

Health Support Services (WA health system)

81 St Georges Terrace, Perth, 6000, AU

Last Update: 02/04/2026

View Profile
751/1000Fair

Health Support Services (HSS) is the Western Australian Government agency providing shared services to the state’s public health system. We provide a suite of financial, ICT, procurement and supply, and workforce services to more than 65,000 employees across WA’s publ...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:1,118
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Philips

Philips

Amstelplein 2, Amsterdam, 1096 BC, NL

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
701/1000Moderate

Over the past decade we have transformed into a focused leader in health technology. At Philips, our purpose is to improve people’s health and well-being through meaningful innovation. We aim to improve 2.5 billion lives per year by 2030, including 400 million in under...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:71,631
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Health Support Services (WA health system)

Health Support Services (WA health system)

-
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
Philips

Philips

-
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 Health Support Services (WA health system) in 2026.

Incidents

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

Philips has 3.85% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Health Support Services (WA health system) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Health Support Services (WA health system) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Philips (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Philips 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...
Health Support Services (WA health system)

Health Support Services (WA health system)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
HEA3002130101725
Philips

Philips

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
ODI1771093701
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
PHI258072525

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-66064
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/handler.go sendFile handler opened files using a cleaned path but derived the authorization filename from raw req.URL.Path, so a trailing slash could bypass .goshs ACL-file protection and block-list checks. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-66063
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.5, the httpserver/updown.go multipart upload handler split part.FileName() on / but did not reject .., allowing an unauthenticated upload with filename .. to create a file outside the served tree. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.5.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
2.5
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-64863
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. Prior to 2.1.4, the httpserver/server.go wdGuard handled WebDAV MOVE as a write-only method and did not enforce --no-delete, allowing WebDAV clients to delete or overwrite files via MOVE with Overwrite: T. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-62325
SUMMARY

goshs is a feature-rich single-binary file server for red teamers and developers. From 2.1.3 until 2.1.4, the sftpserver/sftpserver.go password handler used Username != "" && Password != "", so running goshs with -b 'admin:' -sftp and no -fkf left both SFTP authentication handlers unset and allowed unauthenticated file access. This issue is fixed in version 2.1.4.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59921
SUMMARY

Netty is an asynchronous, event-driven network application framework. Prior to versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final, HttpPostRequestEncoder constructs multipart HTTP request bodies by directly concatenating user-supplied filenames and field names into Content-Disposition MIME headers without validating or sanitizing CRLF characters (\r\n). Since MIME headers are delimited by CRLF, an attacker who controls the filename can inject arbitrary MIME headers into the multipart body part. The root cause is that neither the encoder nor the FileUpload implementations' setFilename() methods, which only check for null, neutralize CRLF characters before the filename is embedded into the header. This issue has been fixed in versions 4.1.136.Final and 4.2.16.Final.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-28
UPDATED
Date2026-07-28
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.7
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1