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

Comparison Overview

MercyMercy
VS
RHÖN-KLINIKUM AGRHÖN-KLINIKUM AG
Mercy

Mercy

15740 South Outer Forty Road, Chesterfield, 63017 , US

Last Update: 29/03/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
https://www.mercy.net/
790/1000Fair

Mercy, one of the 15 largest U.S. health systems and named the top large system in the U.S. for excellent patient experience by NRC Health, serves millions annually with nationally recognized care and one of the nation’s largest and highest performing Accountable Care O...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:29,559
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG

RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG

1 Schlossplatz, Bad Neustadt an der Saale, DE, 97616

Last Update: 11/05/2026

View Profile
764/1000Fair

Die RHÖN‐KLINIKUM AG ist einer der größten Gesundheitsdienstleister in Deutschland. Die Kliniken bieten exzellente Medizin mit direkter Anbindung zu Universitäten und Forschungseinrichtungen. An den fünf Standorten Campus Bad Neustadt, Klinikum Frankfurt (Oder), Univers...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:335
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Mercy

Mercy

-
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
RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG

RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG

-
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 Mercy in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG in 2026.

Incidents

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

Mercy cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG (X = Date, Y = Severity)

RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG 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...
Mercy

Mercy

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG

RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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