Comparison Overview

Michigan Medicine

VS

Johns Hopkins Medicine

Michigan Medicine

1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Ann Arbor, MI, US, 48109
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 700 and 749

Michigan Medicine, based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, is part of one of the world’s leading universities. Michigan Medicine is a premier, highly ranked academic medical center and award-winning health care system with state-of-the-art facilities. Our vision is to create the future of health care through scientific discovery, innovations in education, and the most effective and compassionate care. We want to be the leader in health care, health care reform, and biomedical innovation. Michigan Medicine includes the U-M Hospitals and Health Centers; the U-M Medical School and its Faculty Group Practice; one of the nation's largest biomedical research communities; and education programs that train thousands of future health professionals and scientists each year. We were formerly known as the University of Michigan Medical Center; today that term applies generally to the collection of buildings on our main medical campus in Ann Arbor. We have a close partnership with the U-M School of Nursing and other health sciences schools at U-M. Through the Michigan Health Corporation, we are able to form partnerships outside of our University.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 14,206
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
3

Johns Hopkins Medicine

600 N. Wolfe Street, None, Baltimore, MD, US, 21231
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Johns Hopkins Medicine is a governing structure for the University’s School of Medicine and the health system, coordinating their research, teaching, patient care, and related enterprises. The Johns Hopkins Hospital opened in 1889, followed four years later by the university’s School of Medicine, revolutionizing medical practice, teaching, and research in the United States. The hospital is now part of the Johns Hopkins Health System, which includes two other acute-care hospitals and additional integrated health-care delivery components, with a network of primary and specialty care practices throughout Maryland, outpatient care, long-term care, and home care. The Johns Hopkins University opened in 1876 as America’s first research university, founded for the express purpose of expanding knowledge and putting that knowledge to work for the good of humanity. Two Interconnected Institutions: Over the years, the University and Hospital have grown, and—sometimes jointly, sometimes separately—they have created affiliated organizations. The Johns Hopkins Institutions is a collective name for the University and the Johns Hopkins Health System. The Johns Hopkins University includes nine academic and research divisions, and numerous centers, institutes, and affiliated entities. Johns Hopkins Medicine is a governing structure for the University’s School of Medicine and the health system, coordinating their research, teaching, patient care, and related enterprises.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 37,532
Subsidiaries: 25
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/michigan-medicine.jpeg
Michigan Medicine
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/johns-hopkins-medicine.jpeg
Johns Hopkins Medicine
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
Michigan Medicine
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Johns Hopkins Medicine
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 Michigan Medicine in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Johns Hopkins Medicine in 2025.

Incident History — Michigan Medicine (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Michigan Medicine cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Johns Hopkins Medicine (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Johns Hopkins Medicine cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/michigan-medicine.jpeg
Michigan Medicine
Incidents

Date Detected: 01/2023
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Third-party vendor compromise
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 8/2022
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Phishing
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 08/2022
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Phishing
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/johns-hopkins-medicine.jpeg
Johns Hopkins Medicine
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: External Hacking
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Johns Hopkins Medicine company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Michigan Medicine company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Michigan Medicine company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Johns Hopkins Medicine company.

In the current year, Johns Hopkins Medicine company and Michigan Medicine company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Johns Hopkins Medicine company nor Michigan Medicine company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Johns Hopkins Medicine company and Michigan Medicine company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Michigan Medicine company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Johns Hopkins Medicine company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Michigan Medicine company nor Johns Hopkins Medicine company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Michigan Medicine nor Johns Hopkins Medicine holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Johns Hopkins Medicine company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Michigan Medicine company.

Johns Hopkins Medicine company employs more people globally than Michigan Medicine company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Michigan Medicine nor Johns Hopkins Medicine holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Michigan Medicine nor Johns Hopkins Medicine holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Michigan Medicine nor Johns Hopkins Medicine holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Michigan Medicine nor Johns Hopkins Medicine holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Michigan Medicine nor Johns Hopkins Medicine holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Michigan Medicine nor Johns Hopkins Medicine 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