Comparison Overview
Mount Sinai Solutions

Mount Sinai Solutions
150 E 42nd St, New York, NY, US, 10017
Last Update: 21/02/2026
Mount Sinai Solutions is a leading value-based care provider in the greater New York region. Serving over 400,000 lives, Mount Sinai Solutions is focused on the needs of patients and their employers and unions. It offers products, either directly or through partnerships...

Advocate Health
1111 Metropolitan Ave, Charlotte, 28204, US
Last Update: 02/04/2026
Advocate Health is redefining how, when and where care is delivered to help people live well. We’re providing equitable care for all in our communities and using our combined strength and expertise to deliver better outcomes at a lower cost. Headquartered in Charlotte,...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Mount Sinai Solutions







Advocate Health






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Mount Sinai Solutions in 2026.
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Advocate Health in 2026.
Incident History - Mount Sinai Solutions (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Mount Sinai Solutions cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Advocate Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Advocate Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Mount Sinai Solutions

Advocate Health
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
A security flaw has been discovered in THU-MIG yoloe up to 40cd606cabdbe2b566d6f14a6b162c89206e9a1b. This affects the function eval of the file ultralytics/nn/autobackend.py of the component AutoBackend Model Loading. The manipulation of the argument imgsz/names/kpt_shape results in improper neutralization of directives in dynamically evaluated code. The attack requires a local approach. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. This product does not use versioning. This is why information about affected and unaffected releases are unavailable. The project was informed of the problem early through an issue report but has not responded yet.
Coder before 2.34.7 contains an IP spoofing vulnerability in the ExtractRealIPAddress middleware that trusts the leftmost, client-supplied X-Forwarded-For value instead of the client IP appended by a reverse proxy. Attackers can send forged X-Forwarded-For values through appending proxies to bypass per-IP rate limits on login, one-time passcode, and password validation endpoints, enabling brute-force attacks, and to falsify IP addresses recorded in audit logs.
Coder before 2.29.17, 2.30.0 before 2.32.7, 2.33.0 before 2.33.8, and 2.34.0 before 2.34.2 contains a user enumeration vulnerability because userpassword.Compare() substitutes a placeholder hash derived from the string "hunter2" when a stored password hash is empty. Unauthenticated attackers can submit logins with the password "hunter2" and distinguish HTTP 403 from 401 responses to enumerate valid accounts and reveal the authentication provider of SSO-only users.
Coder before 2.29.17, 2.30.0 before 2.32.7, 2.33.0 before 2.33.8, and 2.34.0 before 2.34.2 contains a stored HTML injection vulnerability because the ApplicationName and LogoURL appearance settings are rendered into HTML output without sufficient escaping. Attackers with the Owner role can store HTML markup in these settings that renders in the Coder dashboard and in SMTP notification emails sent to other deployment users.
Coder from 2.0.0 before 2.34.8 contains an open redirect vulnerability in handleAPIKeySmuggling that allows attackers to redirect users externally via unsanitized r.URL.Path values. Attackers can craft links on trusted workspace app subdomains with paths beginning with double slashes, which become scheme-relative redirects to attacker sites for phishing.