Comparison Overview

OneAdvanced Health & Care

VS

Gainwell Technologies

OneAdvanced Health & Care

210 Eureka Park, Ashford, Kent, TN25 4AZ, GB
Last Update: 2025-02-26 (UTC)
Between 800 and 900

Strong

We power the world of work through our health and care software portfolio that effortlessly get the job done.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 0
Subsidiaries: 14
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Gainwell Technologies

United States, US
Last Update: 2025-09-26 (UTC)

Strong

For 50 years, our nationโ€™s federal Medicaid program has worked to improve the health, safety and well-being of Americaโ€™s most vulnerable populations: low-income families, women and children, seniors, and those with disabilities. With positive health and cost outcomes that pierce inequities and impact economies, the success of these programs is inextricably tied to the prosperity of communities, individual states and the nation as a whole. We think that demands respect and, more importantly, is deserving of a lifetime commitment from innovators who can help those who operate within and around health and human services evolve โ€” in any market at any stage. At Gainwell Technologies, thatโ€™s our sole focus. Built across more than five decades, Gainwell has intentionally seized opportunities to advance its digitally enabled services to meet agencies, health plans and MCOs where they are on their modernization journeys and propel them into the future of public health. Our commitment to innovation, deep experience and ability to leverage insights from customers across 50 states has allowed us to expand on next-generation, cloud-enabled technologies. Today, Gainwell offers one of the most comprehensive suites of scalable services and solutions on the market โ€” all proven to deliver cost savings, better patient outcomes and an improved provider experience. Equally important to our expanding technologies and results: We bring ideas that bring policies to life.

NAICS: 5415
NAICS Definition: Computer Systems Design and Related Services
Employees: 10,143
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/oneadvanced-health-and-care.jpeg
OneAdvanced Health & Care
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gainwell-technologies.jpeg
Gainwell Technologies
โ€”
ISO 27001
Not verified
โ€”
SOC 2
Not verified
โ€”
GDPR
No public badge
โ€”
PCI DSS
No public badge
Compliance Summary
OneAdvanced Health & Care
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Gainwell Technologies
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for OneAdvanced Health & Care in 2025.

Incidents vs IT Services and IT Consulting Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gainwell Technologies in 2025.

Incident History โ€” OneAdvanced Health & Care (X = Date, Y = Severity)

OneAdvanced Health & Care cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History โ€” Gainwell Technologies (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Gainwell Technologies cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/oneadvanced-health-and-care.jpeg
OneAdvanced Health & Care
Incidents

Date Detected: 08/2022
Type:Ransomware
Motivation: Financial gain
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gainwell-technologies.jpeg
Gainwell Technologies
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2024
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Social Engineering (Unauthorized Caller Access to Reimbursement Account)
Motivation: Unknown (Potential Financial or Data Theft)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 01/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Both OneAdvanced Health & Care company and Gainwell Technologies company demonstrate a comparable AI risk posture, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Gainwell Technologies company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to OneAdvanced Health & Care company.

In the current year, Gainwell Technologies company and OneAdvanced Health & Care company have not reported any cyber incidents.

OneAdvanced Health & Care company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Gainwell Technologies company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Gainwell Technologies company has disclosed at least one data breach, while OneAdvanced Health & Care company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Gainwell Technologies company nor OneAdvanced Health & Care company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither OneAdvanced Health & Care company nor Gainwell Technologies company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

OneAdvanced Health & Care company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Gainwell Technologies company.

Gainwell Technologies company employs more people globally than OneAdvanced Health & Care company, reflecting its scale as a IT Services and IT Consulting.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A vulnerability was found in LaChatterie Verger up to 1.2.10. This impacts the function redirectToAuthorization of the file /src/main/services/mcp/oauth/provider.ts. The manipulation of the argument URL results in deserialization. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been made public and could be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

A vulnerability has been found in SeriaWei ZKEACMS up to 4.3. This affects the function Delete of the file src/ZKEACMS.Redirection/Controllers/UrlRedirectionController.cs of the component POST Request Handler. The manipulation leads to improper authorization. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:N/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: jfs: fix invalid free of JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap in diUnmount syzbot found an invalid-free in diUnmount: BUG: KASAN: double-free in slab_free mm/slub.c:3661 [inline] BUG: KASAN: double-free in __kmem_cache_free+0x71/0x110 mm/slub.c:3674 Free of addr ffff88806f410000 by task syz-executor131/3632 CPU: 0 PID: 3632 Comm: syz-executor131 Not tainted 6.1.0-rc7-syzkaller-00012-gca57f02295f1 #0 Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 10/26/2022 Call Trace: <TASK> __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:88 [inline] dump_stack_lvl+0x1b1/0x28e lib/dump_stack.c:106 print_address_description+0x74/0x340 mm/kasan/report.c:284 print_report+0x107/0x1f0 mm/kasan/report.c:395 kasan_report_invalid_free+0xac/0xd0 mm/kasan/report.c:460 ____kasan_slab_free+0xfb/0x120 kasan_slab_free include/linux/kasan.h:177 [inline] slab_free_hook mm/slub.c:1724 [inline] slab_free_freelist_hook+0x12e/0x1a0 mm/slub.c:1750 slab_free mm/slub.c:3661 [inline] __kmem_cache_free+0x71/0x110 mm/slub.c:3674 diUnmount+0xef/0x100 fs/jfs/jfs_imap.c:195 jfs_umount+0x108/0x370 fs/jfs/jfs_umount.c:63 jfs_put_super+0x86/0x190 fs/jfs/super.c:194 generic_shutdown_super+0x130/0x310 fs/super.c:492 kill_block_super+0x79/0xd0 fs/super.c:1428 deactivate_locked_super+0xa7/0xf0 fs/super.c:332 cleanup_mnt+0x494/0x520 fs/namespace.c:1186 task_work_run+0x243/0x300 kernel/task_work.c:179 exit_task_work include/linux/task_work.h:38 [inline] do_exit+0x664/0x2070 kernel/exit.c:820 do_group_exit+0x1fd/0x2b0 kernel/exit.c:950 __do_sys_exit_group kernel/exit.c:961 [inline] __se_sys_exit_group kernel/exit.c:959 [inline] __x64_sys_exit_group+0x3b/0x40 kernel/exit.c:959 do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 [inline] do_syscall_64+0x3d/0xb0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x63/0xcd [...] JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap is not setting to NULL after free in diUnmount. If jfs_remount() free JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap but then failed at diMount(). JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap will be freed once again. Fix this problem by setting JFS_IP(ipimap)->i_imap to NULL after free.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: scsi: qla2xxx: Fix deletion race condition System crash when using debug kernel due to link list corruption. The cause of the link list corruption is due to session deletion was allowed to queue up twice. Here's the internal trace that show the same port was allowed to double queue for deletion on different cpu. 20808683956 015 qla2xxx [0000:13:00.1]-e801:4: Scheduling sess ffff93ebf9306800 for deletion 50:06:0e:80:12:48:ff:50 fc4_type 1 20808683957 027 qla2xxx [0000:13:00.1]-e801:4: Scheduling sess ffff93ebf9306800 for deletion 50:06:0e:80:12:48:ff:50 fc4_type 1 Move the clearing/setting of deleted flag lock.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/ksm: fix race with VMA iteration and mm_struct teardown exit_mmap() will tear down the VMAs and maple tree with the mmap_lock held in write mode. Ensure that the maple tree is still valid by checking ksm_test_exit() after taking the mmap_lock in read mode, but before the for_each_vma() iterator dereferences a destroyed maple tree. Since the maple tree is destroyed, the flags telling lockdep to check an external lock has been cleared. Skip the for_each_vma() iterator to avoid dereferencing a maple tree without the external lock flag, which would create a lockdep warning.