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

Comparison Overview

UVA Outpatient Imaging CulpeperUVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper
VS
Highmark HealthHighmark Health
UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper

UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper

509 S Main Street, Culpeper, 22701, US

Last Update: 04/03/2026

View Profile
762/1000Fair

Outpatient Imaging Culpeper is centrally located in Culpeper, VA. Our central location is conveniently located close to home or work. Our expanded evening and weekend appointments make fitting healthcare into busy schedules even easier. Dedicated to quality and service,...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:8
Subsidiaries:16
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Highmark Health

Highmark Health

120 5th Ave, Pittsburgh, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
711/1000Moderate

A national blended health organization, Highmark Health and our leading businesses support millions of customers with products, services and solutions closely aligned to our mission of creating remarkable health experiences, freeing people to be their best. Headquarter...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:15,521
Subsidiaries:13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper

UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper

-
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
Highmark Health

Highmark Health

-
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 UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Highmark Health in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Highmark Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Highmark Health 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...
UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper

UVA Outpatient Imaging Culpeper

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Highmark Health

Highmark Health

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Data Leak
HIG53025623
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
HIG305072725
🔒 Incident : Breach
HIG13581522

FAQ

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