Comparison Overview

LUX MED

VS

Prisma Health

LUX MED

Szturmowa 2 Warszawa, 02-678, PL
Last Update: 2025-11-26
Between 750 and 799

LUX MED - leader and trustworthy expert We care for the health of the patients professionally and with engagement, we have been developing our business for over 20 years. Today we are the leader and expert on the private healthcare market. We take under our care both individual patients and corporate ones and their families. Out-patient activity is realized under two leading and complementary brands - LUX MED and Medycyna Rodzinna. We have an impressive network, which is created by over 1600 facilities with modern equipment throughout Poland, where we diagnose, examine and treat over 1 200 000 patients. We already have our own 114 medical centers, 1500 cooperating facilities and one of the biggest in Poland private diagnostic database. In 2010 we opened a hospital in Warsaw. We have over 8500 employees, including 4100 medical doctors of various specialties. Trust, satisfaction and health of the patients are values that we put great importance to. Meeting your expectations we are still perfecting our standards and implementing new solutions to provide constantly high quality of services, easy access to the doctors, consultations and examinations.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 10,001
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Prisma Health

300 E McBee Ave, None, Greenville, South Carolina, US, 29601
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Prisma Health is the largest not-for-profit health organization in South Carolina, serving more than 1.2 million patients annually. Our facilities in the Greenville and Columbia surrounding markets are dedicated to improving the health of all South Carolinians through improved clinical quality, access to care and patient experience, while also addressing the rising cost of health care. Our Purpose: Inspire health. Serve with compassion. Be the difference.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 12,865
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lux-med.jpeg
LUX MED
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/prisma-health.jpeg
Prisma Health
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
LUX MED
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Prisma Health
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 LUX MED in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Prisma Health in 2025.

Incident History — LUX MED (X = Date, Y = Severity)

LUX MED cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Prisma Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Prisma Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lux-med.jpeg
LUX MED
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/prisma-health.jpeg
Prisma Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2019
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Stolen Credentials
Blog: Blog

FAQ

LUX MED company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Prisma Health company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Prisma Health company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas LUX MED company has not reported any.

In the current year, Prisma Health company and LUX MED company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Prisma Health company nor LUX MED company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Prisma Health company nor LUX MED company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Prisma Health company nor LUX MED company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither LUX MED company nor Prisma Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither LUX MED nor Prisma Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Prisma Health company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to LUX MED company.

Prisma Health company employs more people globally than LUX MED company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither LUX MED nor Prisma Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither LUX MED nor Prisma Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither LUX MED nor Prisma Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither LUX MED nor Prisma Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither LUX MED nor Prisma Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither LUX MED nor Prisma Health holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H