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

Comparison Overview

MedibankMedibank
VS
Marsh RiskMarsh Risk
Medibank

Medibank

720 Bourke Street Docklands, Melbourne, Victoria, AU, 3008

Last Update: 24/09/2026

View Profile
357/1000Critical

At Medibank, we are motivated by improving the health and wellbeing of all Australians. We’re passionate about building a better health system that’s centred on people and sustainable for the long term. That commitment extends to our people, too. In 2026, we were reco...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:3,914
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
3
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
3
Marsh Risk

Marsh Risk

1166 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York, US, 10036

Last Update: 08/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.marsh.com
796/1000Fair

We help our clients and colleagues grow — and our communities thrive — by protecting and promoting possibility. We seek better ways to manage risk and define more effective paths to the right outcome. We go beyond risk to rewards for our clients, our company, our collea...

NAICS:524
NAICS Definition:Insurance Carriers and Related Activities
Employees:26,578
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Medibank

Medibank

-
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
Marsh Risk

Marsh Risk

-
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 Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

Medibank has 89.87% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incidents vs Insurance Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Marsh Risk in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Medibank (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Medibank cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Marsh Risk (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Marsh Risk 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...
Medibank

Medibank

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
MEDOPT1786343034
🔒 Incident : Breach
OPTMEDQAN1784773430
🔒 Incident : Breach
LATORIQANAUSMEDOPT1790224558
Marsh Risk

Marsh Risk

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA