Comparison Overview

Rush University Medical Center

VS

GeBBS Healthcare Solutions

Rush University Medical Center

1620 W Harrison St, Chicago, 60612, US
Last Update: 2026-01-17
Between 750 and 799

Rush University Medical Center is an academic medical center that includes a 671-bed hospital serving adults and children, the 61-bed Johnston R. Bowman Health Center and Rush University. Rush University is home to one of the first medical colleges in the Midwest and one of the nation's top-ranked nursing colleges, as well as graduate programs in allied health, health systems management and biomedical research. The medical center also offers more than 70 highly selective residency and fellowship programs in medical and surgical specialties and subspecialties. For more than 170 years, Rush has been leading the way in developing innovative and often life-saving treatments. Today, Rush is a thriving center for basic and clinical research, with physicians and scientists involved in hundreds of research projects developing and testing the effectiveness and safety of new therapies and medical devices. In addition to its mission in patient care, education and research, Rush maintains a strong commitment to the community. Rush reaches out to the Chicago community through such offerings as the Rush Community Services Initiatives Program, an umbrella for several student-led outreach programs designed to address the social and health care needs of residents in neighboring communities.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 12,161
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

GeBBS Healthcare Solutions

100 S Shore Dr, East Haven, 06512, US
Last Update: 2026-01-18
Between 750 and 799

GeBBS Healthcare Solutions is a KLAS rated leading provider of Revenue Cycle Management (RCM) services and Risk Adjustment solutions. GeBBS’ innovative technology, combined with over 14,000-strong global workforce, helps clients improve financial performance, adhere to compliance, and enhance the patient experience. Headquartered in East Haven, CT, GeBBS is backed by EQT, one of the premier private equity funds in Europe. GeBBS has won numerous accolades for its medical coding outsourcing and medical billing outsourcing, including being ranked in Modern Healthcare’s Top 10 Largest RCM Firms, Black Book Market Research’s Top 20 RCM Outsourcing Services, and Inc. 5000’s fastest growing private companies in the U.S. For more information, please visit www.gebbs.com.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,106
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rush-university-medical-center.jpeg
Rush University Medical Center
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/gebbs-healthcare-solutions.jpeg
GeBBS Healthcare Solutions
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
Rush University Medical Center
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
GeBBS Healthcare Solutions
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 Rush University Medical Center in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for GeBBS Healthcare Solutions in 2026.

Incident History — Rush University Medical Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rush University Medical Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — GeBBS Healthcare Solutions (X = Date, Y = Severity)

GeBBS Healthcare Solutions cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rush-university-medical-center.jpeg
Rush University Medical Center
Incidents

Date Detected: 01/2019
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access/Disclosure
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gebbs-healthcare-solutions.jpeg
GeBBS Healthcare Solutions
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Rush University Medical Center company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Rush University Medical Center company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company has not reported any.

In the current year, GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company and Rush University Medical Center company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company nor Rush University Medical Center company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company nor Rush University Medical Center company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company nor Rush University Medical Center company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Rush University Medical Center company nor GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Rush University Medical Center nor GeBBS Healthcare Solutions holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Rush University Medical Center company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company.

Rush University Medical Center company employs more people globally than GeBBS Healthcare Solutions company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Rush University Medical Center nor GeBBS Healthcare Solutions holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Rush University Medical Center nor GeBBS Healthcare Solutions holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Rush University Medical Center nor GeBBS Healthcare Solutions holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Rush University Medical Center nor GeBBS Healthcare Solutions holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Rush University Medical Center nor GeBBS Healthcare Solutions holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Rush University Medical Center nor GeBBS Healthcare Solutions holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N