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

Comparison Overview

MGMAMGMA
VS
Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation TrustGuy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust
MGMA

MGMA

104 Inverness Terrace East, Englewood, 80112, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
https://www.mgma.com
719/1000Moderate

The Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) helps create successful medical practices that deliver the highest-quality patient care. As the leading association for medical practice administrators and executives since 1926, MGMA helps improve members’ practices throu...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:316
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust

Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust

Westminster Bridge Road, London, SE1 7EH, GB

Last Update: 07/06/2026

View Profile
448/1000Critical

One of the largest Trusts in the UK, Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust comprises five of the UK’s best known hospitals – Guy’s, St Thomas’, Evelina London Children’s Hospital, Royal Brompton and Harefield – as well as community services in Lambeth and Southwark,...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:11,299
Subsidiaries:4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
MGMA

MGMA

-
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
Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust

Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust

-
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 MGMA in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust in 2026.

Incidents

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

MGMA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
MGMA

MGMA

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
MGM617071524
Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust

Guy's and St Thomas'​ NHS Foundation Trust

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
SYNGUY1771180010
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
SYNKINGUY1780792100
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
GUYSYN1780526611

FAQ

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