Comparison Overview
Milliman Advanced Risk Adjusters® (MARA)

Milliman Advanced Risk Adjusters® (MARA)
N/A
Last Update: 01/04/2026
Assessing patient risk is critical in today's healthcare environment. Milliman Advanced Risk Adjusters (MARA)™ lets you stay a step ahead. MARA is at the heart of today's leading population healthcare analytics platforms. It provides patient risk insight in the electro...

Philips
Amstelplein 2, Amsterdam, 1096 BC, NL
Last Update: 14/08/2026
Over the past decade we have transformed into a focused leader in health technology. At Philips, our purpose is to improve people’s health and well-being through meaningful innovation. We aim to improve 2.5 billion lives per year by 2030, including 400 million in under...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Milliman Advanced Risk Adjusters® (MARA)







Philips






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Milliman Advanced Risk Adjusters® (MARA) in 2026.
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
Philips has 94.17% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.
Incident History - Milliman Advanced Risk Adjusters® (MARA) (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Milliman Advanced Risk Adjusters® (MARA) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Philips (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Philips cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Milliman Advanced Risk Adjusters® (MARA)

Philips
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
In OpenStack Ironic before 38.0.1, the autodetect deploy interface may fail to run cleaning immediately after enrollment with, or changing to, the autodetect deploy interface.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. A user with FEATURE_BUILD_SUPPORT enabled and repository write access can exploit a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability within the build API. This allows the user to provide a malicious URL, causing the Quay builder to make requests to internal network addresses. Such an action could lead to the disclosure of sensitive internal information.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's exported logs feature. An unauthenticated attacker with a valid file ID could download exported action logs without proper authorization. While file IDs are complex, they can be intercepted from plaintext email or webhook callbacks. This vulnerability leads to information disclosure, potentially exposing sensitive data such as usernames, email addresses, IP addresses, and action-specific metadata.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay's Stripe billing webhook handler. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to forge billing events by sending crafted JSON requests to the `/webhooks/stripe` endpoint without validating the Stripe-Signature header. Successful exploitation can lead to the unauthorized resetting of a namespace's build quota to its maximum and trigger unsolicited billing emails to namespace administrators.
A flaw was found in Red Hat Quay. When the SECURITY_SCANNER_V4_PSK (pre-shared key) is not set, a remote unauthenticated attacker can send POST requests to the security scanner notification endpoint. This allows the attacker to flood the notification queue and inject path traversal characters into Clair API URL paths. The primary consequence is worker resource exhaustion and blind path manipulation on the configured Clair host, potentially leading to a denial of service.