Comparison Overview

Smile Brands Inc.

VS

Geisinger

Smile Brands Inc.

675 Anton Blvd, Suite 500, Costa Mesa, California, US, 92626
Last Update: 2025-12-03
Between 700 and 749

It all starts with a smile. Smile Brands has built a rewarding culture around Smiles for Everyone™. The simple idea that every interaction is an opportunity to create happiness. The result is happier doctors, happier team members, and happier patients. Employees repeatedly vote Smile Brands as one of the nation’s best places to work. Patients recommend their experiences to family and friends. Partner doctors rave about the support and peace of mind they receive from a Smile Brands transition. When everyone wins, everyone smiles.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 3,386
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Geisinger

100 North Academy Avenue, Danville, 17822, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 600 and 649

Geisinger is among the nation’s leading providers of value-based care, serving 1.2 million people in urban and rural communities across Pennsylvania. Founded in 1915 by philanthropist Abigail Geisinger, the nonprofit system generates $10 billion in annual revenues across 126 care sites — including 10 hospital campuses — and Geisinger Health Plan, with more than half a million members in commercial and government plans. Geisinger College of Health Sciences educates more than 5,000 medical professionals annually and conducts more than 1,400 clinical research studies. With 26,000 employees, including 1,700 employed physicians, Geisinger is among Pennsylvania’s largest employers with an estimated economic impact of $15 billion to the state’s economy. On March 31, 2024, Geisinger became the first member of Risant Health, a new nonprofit charitable organization created to expand and accelerate value-based care across the country. For more information, visit geisinger.org/careers or connect with us on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and Twitter.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 15,443
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
4
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/smile-brands-inc..jpeg
Smile Brands Inc.
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/geisinger.jpeg
Geisinger
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
Smile Brands Inc.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Geisinger
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 Smile Brands Inc. in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Geisinger in 2025.

Incident History — Smile Brands Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Smile Brands Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Geisinger (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Geisinger cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/smile-brands-inc..jpeg
Smile Brands Inc.
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2021
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2021
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/geisinger.jpeg
Geisinger
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: insider threat, privilege abuse
Motivation: unauthorized data access, potential financial gain (unconfirmed), malicious intent
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Insider Access (Former Employee)
Motivation: Financial Gain, Unauthorized Data Access
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 06/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Insider Threat
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Smile Brands Inc. company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Geisinger company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Geisinger company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Smile Brands Inc. company.

In the current year, Geisinger company and Smile Brands Inc. company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Smile Brands Inc. company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Geisinger company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Both Geisinger company and Smile Brands Inc. company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Neither Geisinger company nor Smile Brands Inc. company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Smile Brands Inc. company nor Geisinger company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Smile Brands Inc. nor Geisinger holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Geisinger company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Smile Brands Inc. company.

Geisinger company employs more people globally than Smile Brands Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Smile Brands Inc. nor Geisinger holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Smile Brands Inc. nor Geisinger holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Smile Brands Inc. nor Geisinger holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Smile Brands Inc. nor Geisinger holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Smile Brands Inc. nor Geisinger holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Smile Brands Inc. nor Geisinger holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

HedgeDoc is an open source, real-time, collaborative, markdown notes application. Prior to 1.10.4, some of HedgeDoc's OAuth2 endpoints for social login providers such as Google, GitHub, GitLab, Facebook or Dropbox lack CSRF protection, since they don't send a state parameter and verify the response using this parameter. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.10.4.

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

Langflow versions up to and including 1.6.9 contain a chained vulnerability that enables account takeover and remote code execution. An overly permissive CORS configuration (allow_origins='*' with allow_credentials=True) combined with a refresh token cookie configured as SameSite=None allows a malicious webpage to perform cross-origin requests that include credentials and successfully call the refresh endpoint. An attacker-controlled origin can therefore obtain fresh access_token / refresh_token pairs for a victim session. Obtained tokens permit access to authenticated endpoints — including built-in code-execution functionality — allowing the attacker to execute arbitrary code and achieve full system compromise.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/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
Description

A vulnerability was detected in xerrors Yuxi-Know up to 0.4.0. This vulnerability affects the function OtherEmbedding.aencode of the file /src/models/embed.py. Performing manipulation of the argument health_url results in server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit is now public and may be used. The patch is named 0ff771dc1933d5a6b78f804115e78a7d8625c3f3. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch. The vendor responded with a vulnerability confirmation and a list of security measures they have established already (e.g. disabled URL parsing, disabled URL upload mode, removed URL-to-markdown conversion).

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.8
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:M/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 4.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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

A security vulnerability has been detected in Rarlab RAR App up to 7.11 Build 127 on Android. This affects an unknown part of the component com.rarlab.rar. Such manipulation leads to path traversal. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. Attacks of this nature are highly complex. It is indicated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. Upgrading to version 7.20 build 128 is able to mitigate this issue. You should upgrade the affected component. The vendor responded very professional: "This is the real vulnerability affecting RAR for Android only. WinRAR and Unix RAR versions are not affected. We already fixed it in RAR for Android 7.20 build 128 and we publicly mentioned it in that version changelog. (...) To avoid confusion among users, it would be useful if such disclosure emphasizes that it is RAR for Android only issue and WinRAR isn't affected."

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 5.1
Severity: HIGH
AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 5.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 2.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/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

A weakness has been identified in ZSPACE Q2C NAS up to 1.1.0210050. Affected by this issue is the function zfilev2_api.OpenSafe of the file /v2/file/safe/open of the component HTTP POST Request Handler. This manipulation of the argument safe_dir causes command injection. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be exploited. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 9.0
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:C/I:C/A:C
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/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