Comparison Overview

Mercy Health

VS

Ramsay Health Care

Mercy Health

Cincinnati, Ohio, US, 45237
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

At Mercy Health, we understand that every family is a universe. A network of people who love, and support, and count on one other to be there. Everybody means the world to someone and we are committed to care for others so they can be there for the ones they love. With nearly 35,000 employees across regions of Ohio and Kentucky, we’re one of the largest health care systems in the country. At each of our more than 600 points of care, we deliver high-quality, compassionate care with one united purpose: to help our patients be well in mind, body and spirit.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 14,007
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
1

Ramsay Health Care

undefined, Sydney, undefined, undefined, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

Ramsay Health Care is a trusted provider of private hospital and healthcare services in Australia, Europe and the United Kingdom. Every year, millions of patients put their trust in Ramsay, confident in our ability to deliver safe, high-quality healthcare with outstanding clinical outcomes. We operate hundreds of hospitals, day surgeries, primary care clinics, mental health services, diagnostics and imaging centres across eight countries. Ramsay’s integrated health services are also available at home and in the community through personalised cancer and cardiac care, psychology, allied health, virtual monitoring and telehealth. Ramsay employs more than 90,000 of the best people in healthcare and supports a wide range of teaching, training and research. We are guided by our longstanding purpose of ‘people caring for people’ and driven by our vision to be a leading healthcare provider of the future.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,111
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mercyhealth-chp.jpeg
Mercy 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/ramsay-health-care.jpeg
Ramsay Health Care
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
Mercy Health
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Ramsay Health Care
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 Mercy Health in 2025.

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

Ramsay Health Care has 33.33% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

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

Mercy Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Ramsay Health Care cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mercyhealth-chp.jpeg
Mercy Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 01/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Invoice Printing Error
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 08/2016
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2016
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Inadvertent Exposure (Misconfigured Internet-Accessible Files)
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ramsay-health-care.jpeg
Ramsay Health Care
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Mercy Health company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ramsay Health Care company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Mercy Health company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Ramsay Health Care company.

In the current year, Ramsay Health Care company has reported more cyber incidents than Mercy Health company.

Neither Ramsay Health Care company nor Mercy Health company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Ramsay Health Care company and Mercy Health company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither Ramsay Health Care company nor Mercy Health company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Mercy Health company nor Ramsay Health Care company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Mercy Health nor Ramsay Health Care holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Mercy Health company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Ramsay Health Care company.

Mercy Health company employs more people globally than Ramsay Health Care company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Mercy Health nor Ramsay Health Care holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Mercy Health nor Ramsay Health Care holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Mercy Health nor Ramsay Health Care holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Mercy Health nor Ramsay Health Care holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Mercy Health nor Ramsay Health Care holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Mercy Health nor Ramsay Health Care 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