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

Johnson & Johnson Vendor Cyber Rating & Cyber Score

jnj.com

At Johnson & Johnson, we believe health is everything. Our strength in healthcare innovation empowers us to build a world where complex diseases are prevented, treated, and cured, where treatments are smarter and less invasive, and solutions are personal. Through our expertise in Innovative Medicine and MedTech, we are uniquely positioned to innovate across the full spectrum of healthcare solutions today to deliver the breakthroughs of tomorrow, and profoundly impact health for humanity. Learn more at https://www.jnj.com. Community Guidelines: http://www.jnj.com/social-media-community-guidelines


JJ A.I CyberSecurity Scoring

JJ
Company Information
Website:http://www.jnj.com
Employees number:118,425
Number of followers:10,025,600
NAICS:62
Industry Type:Hospitals and Health Care
Homepage:jnj.com
JJ Risk Score (AI oriented)
Between 750 and 799
logo
JJHospitals and Health Care
Updated:
20/05/2026
774/1000
Fair
Baa
AaaAaABaaBaBCaaCaC
Powered by our proprietary A.I cyber incident model
Insurance prefers TPRM score to calculate premium
JJ Global Score (TPRM)
xxxx
logo
JJHospitals and Health Care
•••
Score locked
Instant access to detailed risk factors
Vulnerabilities
Benchmark vs. industry & size peers
Findings

JJ
JJFair
Current Score
774Baa (FAIR)
01000
6 incidents
-24 avg impact
Incident timeline with MITRE ATT&CK tactics, techniques, and mitigations.
JUNE 2026
776Before Incident
MAY 2026
772Before Incident
APRIL 2026
773Before Incident
MARCH 2026
772Before Incident
FEBRUARY 2026
798Before Incident
Breach
23 Feb 2026JJ
Ericsson, Rolls-Royce and Johnson & Johnson: Infostealers Fuel Large‑Scale Brute‑Forcing of Corporate SSO Gateways Using Stolen Credentials

Credential Stuffing Campaign Exploits Stolen Employee Logins to Breach Corporate Networks

771After Incident
CRITICAL-27
JOHROLERI1772202424
Credential Stuffing Campaign Exploits Stolen Employee Logins to Breach Corporate Networks A sophisticated credential stuffing campaign targeting corporate Single Sign-On (SSO) gateways particularly F5 BIG-IP interfaces has exposed a growing threat: attackers gaining network access not through software vulnerabilities, but by using stolen employee credentials. First detected on February 23, 2026, by threat intelligence group Defused Cyber, the attack leveraged credentials harvested from infostealer malware infections on employee devices. A single source IP (219.75.254.166, registered to OPTAGE Inc. in Japan) was observed sending large volumes of corporate email and password combinations in automated login attempts. Analysis by Hudson Rock revealed that 77% of the 70 unique credentials used in the attack matched known infostealer infection logs, confirming they were stolen from compromised endpoints rather than a traditional data breach. The credentials were then repurposed against ADFS, Security Token Services (STS), and OWA portals, demonstrating a shift from mere data theft to coordinated network intrusion. Affected organizations included high-profile entities such as Rolls-Royce, Johnson & Johnson, Ericsson, Deloitte, Cellebrite, the Belgian Police, Queensland Police, Turkish government ministries, and major retail conglomerates. Attackers targeted these entities knowing that even a small number of valid logins especially in organizations lacking multi-factor authentication (MFA) could provide initial access. The attack infrastructure further raised concerns, as the source IP was traced to a compromised Fortinet FortiGate-60E firewall with open ports and a self-signed SSL certificate. This indicated attackers were routing traffic through hijacked network devices to target other edge systems, blending stolen credentials with compromised infrastructure. Researchers described the attack as part of a "Log-to-Lead" pipeline, an industrialized process where infostealer malware logs are aggregated, filtered by corporate domain, and sold to Initial Access Brokers on dark web marketplaces. Attackers then purchase these credential packages and use them in large-scale stuffing attacks until they gain access. The campaign underscores a critical shift in cyber threats: identity as the new perimeter. Since devices like F5 BIG-IP often accept the same credentials used for internal systems, a single stolen ADFS password could unlock VPNs, SSO portals, or remote access gateways effectively allowing attackers to bypass traditional security measures.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Credential Stuffing
MOTIVATION
Network intrusion, data exfiltration, potential ransomware deployment
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Employee credentials, potential access to internal systemsADFSSecurity Token Services (STS)OWA portalsF5 BIG-IP interfacesVPNsSSO portalsRemote access gatewaysOperational Impact: Potential unauthorized access to corporate networksBrand Reputation Impact: Potential reputational damage due to unauthorized accessIdentity Theft Risk: High (stolen employee credentials)
DATA BREACH
Type Of Data Compromised: Employee credentialsNumber Of Records Exposed: 70 unique credentialsSensitivity Of Data: High (corporate network access)Personally Identifiable Information: Employee login credentials
Cyber Attack
23 Feb 2026JJ
Rolls-Royce, Ericsson, Johnson & Johnson, OPTAGE Inc. and Turkey Ministry of Trade: Infostealers Drive Massive Brute-Force Attacks on Corporate SSO Gateways with Stolen Credentials

Credential-Stuffing Attacks Target Corporate SSO Systems via Infostealer-Mined Logins

771After Incident
CRITICAL-27
ERIDEFJOHROLVID1772180734
Credential-Stuffing Attacks Target Corporate SSO Systems via Infostealer-Mined Logins A surge in credential-stuffing attacks is targeting corporate Single Sign-On (SSO) systems, with recent campaigns focusing on F5 BIG-IP devices. Security firm Defused Cyber analyzed 70 unique email-password pairs used in the attacks, finding that 77% (54 credentials) matched data from Infostealer infections malware like RedLine, Raccoon, and Vidar that harvests browser-saved logins from compromised employee devices. The attacks, first detected by Defused Cyber’s honeypots, involved malicious authentication attempts from a Japanese IP (219.75.254.166, AS17511, OPTAGE Inc.). Threat actors repurposed stolen credentials to bypass defenses, targeting corporate portals such as ADFS, OWA, and STS, often exploiting weak multi-factor authentication (MFA) enforcement or password reuse. The campaign highlights an industrialized "log-to-lead" pipeline: 1. Infection: Employees’ devices are compromised by Infostealers, which exfiltrate stored credentials. 2. Marketplace: Stolen logs are sold on underground forums to Initial Access Brokers (IABs). 3. Front-Door Bypass: Attackers use valid credentials to access corporate systems like F5 BIG-IP, leveraging their role in authentication. 4. Network Compromise: Legitimate logins grant direct access, bypassing traditional security measures. Compromised credentials linked to high-profile organizations were identified, including Rolls-Royce, Johnson & Johnson, Ericsson, Deloitte, Belgian and Queensland Police, Majid Al Futtaim, Cellebrite, Doka, and Turkey’s Ministry of Trade. The attacks cast a wide net, relying on volume to exploit gaps in MFA or user fatigue. Further investigation revealed the attacks originated from a compromised Fortinet FortiGate-60E firewall hosted by OPTAGE Inc., exposing open ports (541/tcp, 10443/tcp) with a self-signed SSL certificate. This indicates attackers are hijacking network edge devices to launch assaults, turning one organization’s infrastructure into an attack proxy for another. The campaign underscores a shift in cybercriminal tactics from exploiting vulnerabilities to abusing legitimate authentication emphasizing the growing threat of identity-based attacks.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Credential Stuffing
MOTIVATION
Unauthorized access to corporate systems, data exfiltration, potential financial gain
IMPACT
Data Compromised: Browser-saved logins, corporate SSO credentialsF5 BIG-IP devicesADFSOWASTS portalsFortinet FortiGate-60E firewallsOperational Impact: Bypassed authentication, potential unauthorized access to corporate networksBrand Reputation Impact: Potential reputational damage for affected organizationsIdentity Theft Risk: High (stolen credentials, PII exposure)
DATA BREACH
Browser-saved loginsCorporate SSO credentialsNumber Of Records Exposed: 70 unique email-password pairs (54 matched Infostealer logs)Sensitivity Of Data: High (corporate authentication credentials, potential PII)Personally Identifiable Information: Potential (browser-saved credentials may include PII)
JANUARY 2026
796Before Incident
DECEMBER 2025
795Before Incident
NOVEMBER 2025
789Before Incident
OCTOBER 2025
789Before Incident
SEPTEMBER 2025
788Before Incident
AUGUST 2025
787Before Incident
JULY 2025
806Before Incident
Breach
11 Jul 2025JJ
Johnson & Johnson

Misuse of Opioid Settlement Funds

785After Incident
MEDIUM-21
JOH333071125
Johnson & Johnson, along with other companies like CVS Health and Walgreens, has been involved in opioid settlements due to their role in the addiction crisis. The article highlights concerns about the misuse of settlement funds, which were intended to address the opioid crisis but are being diverted to other purposes. This misuse includes spending on unrelated projects like road repairs and jail body scanners, rather than helping those affected by addiction. The misallocation of these funds has led to widespread concern and advocacy for better oversight.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Financial Misuse
MOTIVATION
Financial Gain
IMPACT
Families affected by the overdose crisisRecovery and harm reduction advocatesPolicy expertsResearchers following the cash
AUGUST 2024
820Before Incident
Breach
16 Aug 2024JJ
Johnson & Johnson, Inc.

Johnson & Johnson External System Breach

798After Incident
MEDIUM-22
JOH107072525
The Maine Office of the Attorney General reported that Johnson & Johnson, Inc. experienced an external system breach (hacking) on August 16, 2024, affecting 3,225 individuals in total, including 3 residents of Maine. The breach was discovered on August 17, 2024, and individuals affected were offered 12 months of identity theft protection through Equifax Identity Defense.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Data Breach
IMPACT
Identity Theft Risk: High
JUNE 2023
841Before Incident
Breach
16 Jun 2023JJ
Johnson & Johnson (J&J)

Johnson & Johnson Faces Surge in Baby Powder Cancer Lawsuits After Failed Bankruptcy Settlement Attempt

814After Incident
CRITICAL-27
JOH0362103102825
Johnson & Johnson is facing a 17% surge in lawsuits (now 73,570+ cases) alleging its talc-based baby powder causes cancer, following a failed attempt to force a $9 billion global settlement through bankruptcy court. A recent California jury awarded $966 million to a deceased woman’s family, linking her cancer to long-term baby powder use. Analysts predict total payouts could exceed $11 billion, with J&J already spending $3 billion on prior settlements. The company withdrew the product in 2023 but continues to deny liability, claiming talc is safe. Repeated legal defeats—including a bankruptcy judge rejecting its Chapter 11 strategy—have forced J&J back into state and federal courts, where upcoming trials (starting next month) risk further billion-dollar verdicts. The litigation threatens reputational damage, financial strain (projected $11B+), and operational disruption, as J&J defends cases across multiple jurisdictions while its Kenvue spinoff shares liability. State juries have repeatedly ruled against J&J, though some awards were later reduced on appeal. The escalating caseload (potentially 93,000+ claims) compounds legal costs and public scrutiny, undermining trust in the brand.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Product Liability LitigationMass TortRegulatory Non-Compliance
MOTIVATION
Financial Gain (Plaintiffs)Corporate AccountabilityConsumer Protection
IMPACT
Current Settlements: $3 billion (historical)Projected Total Cost: Up to $11 billionRecent Jury Award: $966 million (California case, 2024-10)Increased litigation workloadReputation damageResource diversion to legal defenseProduct withdrawal (2023)Customer Complaints: 73,570+ lawsuits (as of 2024-09-30)Severe damage due to cancer allegationsLoss of consumer trustNegative media coverageWithdrawal of iconic productMass tort litigationJury awards (e.g., $966M in 2024)Potential federal/federal trialsState-level lawsuits (CA, PA, GA, IL, FL)
JANUARY 2018
847Before Incident
Breach
01 Jan 2018JJ
Johnson & Johnson

Pharmaceutical Company Data Breach

820After Incident
CRITICAL-27
JOH202818522
The home addresses of hundreds of Irish people had been published online in a data breach by a pharmaceutical company. The error left people vulnerable to hackers as the company also shared email addresses that may be linked to other online accounts.
INCIDENT DETAILS -
TYPE
Data Breach
IMPACT
Home addressesEmail addresses
DATA BREACH
Home addressesEmail addressesNumber Of Records Exposed: HundredsSensitivity Of Data: HighPersonally Identifiable Information: Yes

Frequently Asked Questions

?
What is the current A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score for JJ ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in May 2026 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in April 2026 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in March 2026 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in February 2026 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in January 2026 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in December 2025 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in November 2025 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in October 2025 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in September 2025 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in August 2025 ?
?
What was JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score in July 2025 ?
?
What is the average per-incident point impact on JJ's A.I Rankiteo Cyber Score over the past 12 months ?
?
Where can I access detailed records of all cyber incidents associated with JJ ?
?
Where can I find a summary of the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?
?
Where can I view JJ's profile page on Rankiteo ?
?
How accurate is the A.I Rankiteo Risk Scoring methodology ?