Comparison Overview

Lifelites

VS

Good Samaritan Foundation

Lifelites

26 Great Queen Street, London, undefined, WC2B 5BL, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

We believe every child should be able to engage and interact with the people they love and enjoy the world they live in. That’s why over the last 20 years, we have donated specialist assistive technology packages for children with life-limiting conditions using children’s palliative care services throughout the British Isles.

NAICS: 561
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 16
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Good Samaritan Foundation

402 15th Avenue, Suite 101, Puyallup, 98372, US
Last Update: 2025-12-19

For over 55 years, Good Samaritan Hospital has provided comprehensive, family-centered care in East Pierce County. The not-for-profit, 225-bed acute care facility receives philanthropic support from Good Samaritan Foundation, which was formed in 2000 with a mission to inspire philanthropic partnerships to advance and enrich an environment of healing and compassionate care. The Foundation raises community awareness and financial support for the amazing services and programs the hospital offers. The work we do begins with a need. The difference we make depends on you. Gifts from our kind-hearted, community-minded donors have an impact every day at Good Samaritan Hospital. From the smile on a child’s face who is walking thanks to a custom-made brace to the comfort families find with hospice staff. From the amazing recoveries taking place in our renowned Rehabilitation Center to the joyous parents whose infant is nurtured in our Special Care Nursery. Our donors are Good Samaritans.

NAICS: 561499
NAICS Definition: All Other Business Support Services
Employees: 86
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lifelites.jpeg
Lifelites
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/good-samaritan-foundation.jpeg
Good Samaritan Foundation
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
Lifelites
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Good Samaritan Foundation
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Fundraising Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lifelites in 2025.

Incidents vs Fundraising Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Good Samaritan Foundation in 2025.

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

Lifelites cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Good Samaritan Foundation (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Good Samaritan Foundation cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lifelites.jpeg
Lifelites
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/good-samaritan-foundation.jpeg
Good Samaritan Foundation
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Good Samaritan Foundation company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Lifelites company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Good Samaritan Foundation company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Lifelites company.

In the current year, Good Samaritan Foundation company and Lifelites company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Good Samaritan Foundation company nor Lifelites company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Good Samaritan Foundation company nor Lifelites company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Good Samaritan Foundation company nor Lifelites company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Lifelites company nor Good Samaritan Foundation company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Lifelites nor Good Samaritan Foundation holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Lifelites company nor Good Samaritan Foundation company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Good Samaritan Foundation company employs more people globally than Lifelites company, reflecting its scale as a Fundraising.

Neither Lifelites nor Good Samaritan Foundation holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Lifelites nor Good Samaritan Foundation holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Lifelites nor Good Samaritan Foundation holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Lifelites nor Good Samaritan Foundation holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Lifelites nor Good Samaritan Foundation holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Lifelites nor Good Samaritan Foundation holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Versa SASE Client for Windows versions released between 7.8.7 and 7.9.4 contain a local privilege escalation vulnerability in the audit log export functionality. The client communicates user-controlled file paths to a privileged service, which performs file system operations without impersonating the requesting user. Due to improper privilege handling and a time-of-check time-of-use race condition combined with symbolic link and mount point manipulation, a local authenticated attacker can coerce the service into deleting arbitrary directories with SYSTEM privileges. This can be exploited to delete protected system folders such as C:\\Config.msi and subsequently achieve execution as NT AUTHORITY\\SYSTEM via MSI rollback techniques.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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

The WP JobHunt plugin for WordPress, used by the JobCareer theme, is vulnerable to unauthorized modification of data due to a missing capability check on the 'cs_update_application_status_callback' function in all versions up to, and including, 7.7. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Candidate-level access and above, to inject cross-site scripting into the 'status' parameter of applied jobs for any user.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:L
Description

The WP JobHunt plugin for WordPress, used by the JobCareer theme, is vulnerable to Insecure Direct Object Reference in all versions up to, and including, 7.7 via the 'cs_update_application_status_callback' due to missing validation on a user controlled key. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Candidate-level access and above, to send a site-generated email with injected HTML to any user.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
Description

The FiboSearch – Ajax Search for WooCommerce plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Stored Cross-Site Scripting via the plugin's `thegem_te_search` shortcode in all versions up to, and including, 1.32.0 due to insufficient input sanitization and output escaping on user supplied attributes. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with Contributor-level access and above, to inject arbitrary web scripts in pages that will execute whenever a user accesses an injected page. This vulnerability requires TheGem theme (premium) to be installed with Header Builder mode enabled, and the FiboSearch "Replace search bars" option enabled for TheGem integration.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

The Ultimate Member – User Profile, Registration, Login, Member Directory, Content Restriction & Membership Plugin plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Sensitive Information Exposure in all versions up to, and including, 2.11.0 via the ajax_get_members function. This is due to the use of a predictable low-entropy token (5 hex characters derived from md5 of post ID) to identify member directories and insufficient authorization checks on the unauthenticated AJAX endpoint. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to extract sensitive data including usernames, display names, user roles (including administrator accounts), profile URLs, and user IDs by enumerating predictable directory_id values or brute-forcing the small 16^5 token space.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N