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

Comparison Overview

Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957
VS
Boston ScientificBoston Scientific
Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957

Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957

27911 Franklin Parkway, Valencia, 91355, US

Last Update: 05/04/2026

View Profile
648/1000Poor

With 65 years of medical supply experience, Shield is a leading provider of incontinence, urological, enteral nutrition, advanced wound care, diabetes and ostomy supplies. Our mission is to serve the medical supply needs of patients at home with excellence, compassion a...

NAICS:3391
NAICS Definition:Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Employees:483
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1
Boston Scientific

Boston Scientific

100 Boston Scientific Way, Marlborough, 01752, US

Last Update: 01/04/2026

View Profile
790/1000Fair

Boston Scientific transforms lives through innovative medical technologies that improve the health of patients around the world. As a global medical technology leader for more than 40 years, we advance science for life by providing a broad range of high-performance solu...

NAICS:3391
NAICS Definition:Medical Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing
Employees:52,506
Subsidiaries:9
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957

Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957

-
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
Boston Scientific

Boston Scientific

-
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 Medical Equipment Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Medical Equipment Manufacturing Industry Avg (This Year)

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

Incidents

Incident History - Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Boston Scientific (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Boston Scientific 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...
Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957

Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
SHI1765420730
Boston Scientific

Boston Scientific

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
DIS1777998353
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
BOS5595255110425

FAQ

Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 company and Boston Scientific company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 and Boston Scientific, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 and Boston Scientific, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 or Boston Scientific ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 or Boston Scientific ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 and Boston Scientific, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between Shield HealthCare - Medical Supplies for Care at Home Since 1957 and Boston Scientific, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59705
SUMMARY

mem0's openmemory/api component contains an unauthenticated access vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to read, write, and delete arbitrary user memories by accessing API routers registered without authentication middleware. Attackers can supply arbitrary user_id parameters or directly access memory retrieval endpoints to expose private memory content, or invoke pause endpoints with global_pause=true to cause denial-of-service across all users.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-07
UPDATED
Date2026-07-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 9.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 9.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-59704
SUMMARY

Cap's GET /api/video/ai endpoint fails to validate user ownership or membership before returning private video AI metadata including titles, summaries, and chapters. Authenticated attackers can supply arbitrary video IDs to read sensitive AI-generated content and trigger unauthorized AI generation that consumes the video owner's credits without consent.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-07
UPDATED
Date2026-07-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/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
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-55078
SUMMARY

Coder allows organizations to provision remote development environments via Terraform. Starting in version 2.17.0 and prior to versions 2.29.7, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, and 2.34.2, `POST /api/v2/files` converts zip uploads to tar in memory via `CreateTarFromZip`, which enforced a per-entry size limit but no aggregate limit on total decompressed output, writing to an unbounded in-memory buffer. Exploitation requires authenticated file-upload access and the impact is limited to availability (denial of service). The fix in versions 2.29.7, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, and 2.34.2 adds a metadata preflight check that sums projected entry sizes and a streaming writer that enforces the aggregate limit during decompression. As a workaround, restrict file-upload permissions to trusted users or place a reverse proxy with request-body size limits in front of `coderd`.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-07
UPDATED
Date2026-07-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-55077
SUMMARY

Coder allows organizations to provision remote development environments via Terraform. Prior to versions 2.29.7, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, and 2.34.2, the `PUT /api/v2/users/{user}/password` endpoint authorized only `ActionUpdatePersonal` and did not prevent a `user-admin` from resetting an `owner` account's password. It also did not require the current password when an admin reset another user's password. Exploitation requires the privileged `user-admin` role so practical risk is limited to deployments that grant `user-admin` to less trusted operators. The fix in versions 2.29.7, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, and 2.34.2 prevents non-owner users from resetting the password of an account that holds the `owner` role. As a workaround, restrict the `user-admin` role to trusted administrators.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-07
UPDATED
Date2026-07-07
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
5.9
EXPLOITABILITY
1.2
CVE-2026-55076
SUMMARY

Coder allows organizations to provision remote development environments via Terraform. Prior to versions 2.29.7, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, and 2.34.2, Coder's OIDC callback checked `email_verified` with a direct Go `bool` type assertion. When an IdP returned the claim as a non-boolean (for example the string `"false"`) or omitted it, the assertion failed open and the email was treated as verified. Combined with an unconditional email-based account fallback, this enabled account takeover. The fix in versions 2.29.7, 2.32.7, 2.33.8, and 2.34.2 coerces `email_verified` across bool, string and numeric types (fail-closed) and blocks the email fallback when the matched user already has a different linked IdP subject. As a workaround, ensure the IdP returns `email_verified` as a native JSON boolean. The email-fallback linking issue has no configuration workaround; upgrading is required.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-07
UPDATED
Date2026-07-07
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