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

Comparison Overview

Massachusetts General HospitalMassachusetts General Hospital
VS
Oregon Health & Science UniversityOregon Health & Science University
Massachusetts General Hospital

Massachusetts General Hospital

55 Fruit Street, Boston, 02114, US

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.massgeneral.org
742/1000Moderate

Guided by the needs of our patients and their families, Massachusetts General Hospital aims to deliver the very best health care in a safe, compassionate environment; to advance that care through innovative research and education; and, to improve the health and well-b...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:19,712
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1
Oregon Health & Science University

Oregon Health & Science University

3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Rd, Portland, Oregon, US, 97239

Last Update: 30/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://ohsu.edu
785/1000Fair

At OHSU, we deliver breakthroughs for better health. We're driven by the belief that better health starts with innovations in the lab, in the classroom, at the bedside and in our communities. From cancer to Alzheimer's to cardiovascular care, we collaborate every day ...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:17,344
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Massachusetts General Hospital

Massachusetts General Hospital

-
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
Oregon Health & Science University

Oregon Health & Science University

-
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 Massachusetts General Hospital in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Oregon Health & Science University in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Massachusetts General Hospital (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Massachusetts General Hospital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Oregon Health & Science University (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Oregon Health & Science University 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...
Massachusetts General Hospital

Massachusetts General Hospital

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
MAS952072625
🔒 Incident : Breach
MAS11210423
Oregon Health & Science University

Oregon Health & Science University

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
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:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2