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

Comparison Overview

Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe)Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe)
VS
Smith+NephewSmith+Nephew
Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe)

Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe)

N/A

Last Update: 20/04/2026

View Profile
759/1000Fair

This account is intended for a healthcare professional audience in Europe. Omnipod began with a vision from a father and entrepreneur who looked at his young son’s options for insulin delivery and wasn’t satisfied. He knew there had to be a better way. So, he got to wo...

NAICS:339
NAICS Definition:N/A
Employees:0
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Smith+Nephew

Smith+Nephew

5 Hatters Lane, Watford, Hertfordshire, GB, WD18 8YE

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.smith-nephew.com
793/1000Fair

Smith+Nephew is a global medical technology company. We design and manufacture technology that takes the limits off living. We support healthcare professionals to return their patients to health and mobility, helping them to perform at their fullest potential. From our...

NAICS:3391
NAICS Definition:Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Employees:18,909
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe)

Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe)

-
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
Smith+Nephew

Smith+Nephew

-
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 Medical Equipment Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Medical Equipment Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Smith+Nephew in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Smith+Nephew (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Smith+Nephew cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe)

Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe)

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Smith+Nephew

Smith+Nephew

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) company and Smith+Nephew company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) and Smith+Nephew, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) and Smith+Nephew, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) or Smith+Nephew ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) or Smith+Nephew ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) and Smith+Nephew, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Omnipod® for HCPs (Europe) and Smith+Nephew, 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