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

Comparison Overview

OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) LtdOracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd
VS
UnitedHealthcareUnitedHealthcare
OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd

OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd

4 Strathbury Place, Helen Road, Strathavon X31, Sandton, 2031, ZA

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
640/1000Poor

Established in 2001, OracleMed Health has been providing flexible International Health Insurance Products across Africa for almost 20 years. We have built a team of professionals drawn from a broad range of disciplines including medical specialists and healthcare prac...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:39
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
UnitedHealthcare

UnitedHealthcare

9700 Healthcare Lane, Minnetonka, 55343, US

Last Update: 08/07/2026

View Profile
Between 600 and 649
http://www.uhc.com/
624/1000Poor

When it comes to your health, everything matters. That’s why UnitedHealthcare is helping people live healthier lives and making the health system work better for everyone. Our health plans are there for you in moments big and small, delivering a simple experience, affor...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:16,035
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd

OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd

-
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
UnitedHealthcare

UnitedHealthcare

-
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 Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)

UnitedHealthcare has 5.66% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd (X = Date, Y = Severity)

OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - UnitedHealthcare (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UnitedHealthcare cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd

OracleMed Health Investments (Pty) Ltd

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
COL1769038385
UnitedHealthcare

UnitedHealthcare

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
UNI1783549874
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
UNI000121424
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
UNI648080525

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-58281
SUMMARY

Deserialization of untrusted data in Microsoft Edge (Chromium-based) allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-10660
SUMMARY

The Bluetooth BAP Broadcast Assistant GATT client in subsys/bluetooth/audio/bap_broadcast_assistant.c reassembled remote Broadcast Receive State data into a single file-static net_buf_simple (att_buf, BT_ATT_MAX_ATTRIBUTE_LEN = 512 bytes) shared by all connection instances, while the BUSY flag, long-read handle, and reset/offset state were per-connection. When the device acts as a Broadcast Assistant connected to multiple Scan Delegator peripherals, notification and long-read callbacks from different connections interleave on the shared buffer: the append in notify_handler (net_buf_simple_add_mem at the not-busy branch) performs no tailroom check, so receive-state notifications from two or more delegators accumulate on the same 512-byte buffer and, with a sufficiently large configured ATT MTU (BT_L2CAP_TX_MTU up to 2000) and two-to-three concurrent connections, write past the buffer into adjacent .bss (net_buf_simple_add only asserts in debug builds). Even below the overflow threshold, one connection's net_buf_simple_reset zeroes the shared length while another connection's reassembly and GATT read offset are in flight, mixing one peer's data into another's parse. A malicious or compromised Scan Delegator (or two colluding peers) over BLE can trigger this, causing out-of-bounds writes (memory corruption / denial of service) and cross-connection data corruption. The fix moves the buffer into the per-connection instance struct so each connection reassembles into its own buffer. Affects Zephyr releases shipping the Broadcast Assistant with the shared buffer, including v4.4.0 and earlier.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
4.7
EXPLOITABILITY
1.6
CVE-2026-61870
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a memory leak vulnerability in the VIFF encoder when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger allocation failures by processing specially crafted VIFF images to exhaust available memory and cause denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 2.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 2.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.4
CVE-2026-61861
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a use-after-free vulnerability in the FormatMagickCaption method when memory allocation fails. Attackers can trigger memory allocation failures to cause a dangling pointer to reference freed memory, potentially enabling denial of service or code execution.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.7)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.7
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-61858
SUMMARY

ImageMagick before 7.1.2-26 contains a policy bypass vulnerability in the APNG encoder and external delegates due to missing validation checks. Attackers can write files to disallowed paths by bypassing configured policy restrictions through the APNG encoding process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-11
UPDATED
Date2026-07-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 3.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 3.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 4.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8