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

Comparison Overview

Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc.Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc.
VS
Mayo ClinicMayo Clinic
Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc.

Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc.

Mandaluyong City, PH

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.sddi.com.ph
765/1000Fair

Safeguard DNA Diagnostic Inc. (SDDI) is a Philippine Joint Venture company with an equal partnership with Safeguard Biosystems, formed to provide a Molecular Microbiology diagnostic laboratory delivering rapid detection and identification to primarily infectious disease...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:70
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

200 First St. S.W., Rochester, Minnesota, US, 55905

Last Update: 08/06/2026

View Profile
Between 700 and 749
http://www.mayoclinic.org
718/1000Moderate

Mayo Clinic has expanded and changed in many ways, but our values remain true to the vision of our founders. Our primary value – The needs of the patient come first – guides our plans and decisions as we create the future of health care. Join us and you'll find a cultur...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:47,611
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc.

Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc.

-
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
Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

-
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 Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc. in 2026.

Incidents

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

Mayo Clinic has 88.68% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Mayo Clinic (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mayo Clinic 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...
Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc.

Safeguard DNA Diagnostics Inc.

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
SAF5592955110525
Mayo Clinic

Mayo Clinic

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
MAYSOLHONBAS1770310511
🔒 Incident : Breach
XSOHONADVMAY1780958028

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2