Comparison Overview

Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia

VS

UK Home Office

Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia

-, Riyadh, 11176, SA
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 750 and 799

The Ministry of Health (MOH), by way of its objectives, policies and projects included in this strategy, seeks to accomplish a promising future vision; namely, delivering best-quality integrated and comprehensive healthcare services. Carrying health conditions or health status of Saudi inhabitants to the best and highest possible level, in terms of justice and equality in providing healthcare, and in terms of effectiveness and the possibility of incurring the financial burden of the treatment and healthcare. In doing so, the MOH takes as its target meeting citizens’ aspirations in this regard, by providing them with high-quality general and specialized health services, and covering all the population with these services.  Creating a sole and exclusive entity to formulate health policies including health insurance services, etc. (such as operating the recently established Health Services Council.) Adopting a public and national health strategy which focuses of the main morbidity burdens; including non-communicable diseases, nutrition, reproductive health, smoking (tobacco-use), AIDS, traffic accidents, and injuries.   The system must have an effective and fair method for estimating risks and benefits.   Working to diversify sources of revenues to finance the system effectively. These sources must include also public revenues and insurance premiums, in addition to the equally allocated costs and taxes.

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 28,664
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

UK Home Office

2 Marsham Street, London, GB, SW1P 4DF
Last Update: 2026-01-16

At the Home Office, we help to ensure that the country is safe and secure. We’ve been looking after UK citizens since 1782. We are responsible for: - working on the problems caused by illegal drug use - shaping the alcohol strategy, policy and licensing conditions - keeping the United Kingdom safe from the threat of terrorism - reducing and preventing crime, and ensuring people feel safe in their homes and communities - securing the UK border and controlling immigration - considering applications to enter and stay in the UK - issuing passports and visas - supporting visible, responsible and accountable policing by empowering the public and freeing up the police to fight crime - fire prevention and rescue These organisations are all part of the Home Office: - Border Force - HM Passport Office (HMPO) - Immigration Enforcement - UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI)

NAICS: 92
NAICS Definition: Public Administration
Employees: 17,331
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ministry-of-health-saudi-arabia.jpeg
Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia
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/uk-home-office.jpeg
UK Home Office
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
Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
UK Home Office
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia in 2026.

Incidents vs Government Administration Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UK Home Office in 2026.

Incident History — Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — UK Home Office (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UK Home Office cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ministry-of-health-saudi-arabia.jpeg
Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/uk-home-office.jpeg
UK Home Office
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2010
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Human Error, Insecure Data Handling, Improper Access Controls, Accidental Publication
Motivation: Negligence, Operational Failures, Potential Espionage (for Afghan/PSNI breaches), Financial Gain (for dark web sales of leaked data)
Blog: Blog

FAQ

UK Home Office company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

UK Home Office company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company has not reported any.

In the current year, UK Home Office company and Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither UK Home Office company nor Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

UK Home Office company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither UK Home Office company nor Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company nor UK Home Office company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia nor UK Home Office holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company nor UK Home Office company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia company employs more people globally than UK Home Office company, reflecting its scale as a Government Administration.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia nor UK Home Office holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia nor UK Home Office holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia nor UK Home Office holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia nor UK Home Office holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia nor UK Home Office holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ministry of Health Saudi Arabia nor UK Home Office holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N