Comparison Overview

MCG Health

VS

BJC Health System

MCG Health

701 5th Ave, Ste. 4900, Seattle, Washington, US, 98104
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 650 and 699

MCG Health, part of the Hearst Health network, provides unbiased clinical guidance that gives healthcare organizations confidence in their patient-centered care decisions. Our artificial intelligence and technology solutions, infused with objective clinical expertise, enable our clients to prioritize and simplify their work. MCG’s world-class customer service ensures that our clients maximize the benefits of licensing MCG solutions – demonstrating improved financial and clinical outcomes.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 579
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

BJC Health System

4901 Forest Park Avenue, St. Louis, MO, 63108, US
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

BJC Health System is one of the largest nonprofit health care organizations in the United States and the largest in the state of Missouri, serving urban, suburban, and rural communities across Missouri, southern Illinois, eastern Kansas, and the greater Midwest region. One of the largest employers in Missouri, BJC operates as BJC HealthCare in its Eastern Region and as Saint Luke’s Health System in its Western Region. BJC comprises 24 hospitals and hundreds of clinics and service organizations all committed to providing extraordinary patient care and advancing medical breakthroughs. BJC’s nationally recognized academic hospitals—Barnes-Jewish and St. Louis Children’s hospitals—are affiliated with Washington University School of Medicine.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 27,424
Subsidiaries: 21
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mcg-part-of-the-hearst-health-network.jpeg
MCG 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bjc-health-system.jpeg
BJC Health System
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
MCG Health
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
BJC Health System
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 MCG Health in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for BJC Health System in 2025.

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

MCG Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

BJC Health System cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mcg-part-of-the-hearst-health-network.jpeg
MCG Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 3/2022
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 03/2022
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bjc-health-system.jpeg
BJC Health System
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2017
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Configuration Error
Blog: Blog

FAQ

BJC Health System company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to MCG Health company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

MCG Health company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to BJC Health System company.

In the current year, BJC Health System company and MCG Health company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither BJC Health System company nor MCG Health company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both BJC Health System company and MCG Health company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither BJC Health System company nor MCG Health company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither MCG Health company nor BJC Health System company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither MCG Health nor BJC Health System holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

BJC Health System company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to MCG Health company.

BJC Health System company employs more people globally than MCG Health company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither MCG Health nor BJC Health System holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither MCG Health nor BJC Health System holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither MCG Health nor BJC Health System holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither MCG Health nor BJC Health System holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither MCG Health nor BJC Health System holds HIPAA certification.

Neither MCG Health nor BJC Health System holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ThingsBoard in versions prior to v4.2.1 allows an authenticated user to upload malicious SVG images via the "Image Gallery", leading to a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The exploit can be triggered when any user accesses the public API endpoint of the malicious SVG images, or if the malicious images are embedded in an `iframe` element, during a widget creation, deployed to any page of the platform (e.g., dashboards), and accessed during normal operations. The vulnerability resides in the `ImageController`, which fails to restrict the execution of JavaScript code when an image is loaded by the user's browser. This vulnerability can lead to the execution of malicious code in the context of other users' sessions, potentially compromising their accounts and allowing unauthorized actions.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to to verify that the token used during the code exchange originates from the same authentication flow, which allows an authenticated user to perform account takeover via a specially crafted email address used when switching authentication methods and sending a request to the /users/login/sso/code-exchange endpoint. The vulnerability requires ExperimentalEnableAuthenticationTransfer to be enabled (default: enabled) and RequireEmailVerification to be disabled (default: disabled).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to sanitize team email addresses to be visible only to Team Admins, which allows any authenticated user to view team email addresses via the GET /api/v4/channels/{channel_id}/common_teams endpoint

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

Exposure of email service credentials to users without administrative rights in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Devolutions Server: before 2025.2.21, before 2025.3.9.

Description

Exposure of credentials in unintended requests in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Server: through 2025.2.20, through 2025.3.8.