Comparison Overview

Rangely District Hospital

VS

GE HealthCare

Rangely District Hospital

225 Eagle Crest Drive, Rangely, Colorado, 81648-2104, US
Last Update: 2025-12-09

Rangely District Hospital is a 25 bed Critical Access Hospital and Level IV Trauma Center, located at 225 Eagle Crest Drive, Rangely, CO, 81648.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 66
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

GE HealthCare

-, None, Chicago, None, US, None
Last Update: 2025-12-09
Between 800 and 849

Every day millions of people feel the impact of our intelligent devices, advanced analytics and artificial intelligence. As a leading global medical technology and digital solutions innovator, GE HealthCare enables clinicians to make faster, more informed decisions through intelligent devices, data analytics, applications and services, supported by its Edison intelligence platform. With over 100 years of healthcare industry experience and around 50,000 employees globally, the company operates at the center of an ecosystem working toward precision health, digitizing healthcare, helping drive productivity and improve outcomes for patients, providers, health systems and researchers around the world. We embrace a culture of respect, transparency, integrity and diversity and we work to create a world where healthcare has no limits.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 57,635
Subsidiaries: 21
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rangely-district-hospital.jpeg
Rangely District Hospital
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gehealthcare.jpeg
GE HealthCare
ISO 27001
ISO 27001 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
SOC2 Type 1 certification not verified
Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
SOC2 Type 2 certification not verified
Not verified
GDPR
GDPR certification not verified
Not verified
PCI DSS
PCI DSS certification not verified
Not verified
HIPAA
HIPAA certification not verified
Not verified
Compliance Summary
Rangely District Hospital
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
GE HealthCare
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

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

No incidents recorded for Rangely District Hospital in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for GE HealthCare in 2025.

Incident History — Rangely District Hospital (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rangely District Hospital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — GE HealthCare (X = Date, Y = Severity)

GE HealthCare cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rangely-district-hospital.jpeg
Rangely District Hospital
Incidents

Date Detected: 8/2012
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gehealthcare.jpeg
GE HealthCare
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

GE HealthCare company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Rangely District Hospital company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Rangely District Hospital company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas GE HealthCare company has not reported any.

In the current year, GE HealthCare company and Rangely District Hospital company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Rangely District Hospital company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while GE HealthCare company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither GE HealthCare company nor Rangely District Hospital company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither GE HealthCare company nor Rangely District Hospital company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Rangely District Hospital company nor GE HealthCare company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Rangely District Hospital nor GE HealthCare holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

GE HealthCare company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Rangely District Hospital company.

GE HealthCare company employs more people globally than Rangely District Hospital company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Rangely District Hospital nor GE HealthCare holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Rangely District Hospital nor GE HealthCare holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Rangely District Hospital nor GE HealthCare holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Rangely District Hospital nor GE HealthCare holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Rangely District Hospital nor GE HealthCare holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Rangely District Hospital nor GE HealthCare holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

NXLog Agent before 6.11 can load a file specified by the OPENSSL_CONF environment variable.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

uriparser through 0.9.9 allows unbounded recursion and stack consumption, as demonstrated by ParseMustBeSegmentNzNc with large input containing many commas.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 2.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Description

A vulnerability was detected in Mayan EDMS up to 4.10.1. The affected element is an unknown function of the file /authentication/. The manipulation results in cross site scripting. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit is now public and may be used. Upgrading to version 4.10.2 is sufficient to fix this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor confirms that this is "[f]ixed in version 4.10.2". Furthermore, that "[b]ackports for older versions in process and will be out as soon as their respective CI pipelines complete."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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

MJML through 4.18.0 allows mj-include directory traversal to test file existence and (in the type="css" case) read files. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2020-12827.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:L
Description

A half-blind Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in kube-controller-manager when using the in-tree Portworx StorageClass. This vulnerability allows authorized users to leak arbitrary information from unprotected endpoints in the control plane’s host network (including link-local or loopback services).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.8
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:H/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N