Comparison Overview

Stanford Health Care

VS

Hospital Authority

Stanford Health Care

500 Pasteur Dr, None, Palo Alto, California, US, 94304
Last Update: 2025-11-20

Stanford Health Care, with multiple facilities throughout the Bay Area, is internationally renowned for leading edge and coordinated care in cancer care, neurosciences, cardiovascular medicine, surgery, organ transplant, medicine specialties, and primary care. Throughout its history, Stanford has been at the forefront of discovery and innovation, as researchers and clinicians work together to improve health, alleviate suffering, and translate medical breakthroughs into better ways to deliver patient care. Stanford Health Care: Healing humanity through science and compassion, one patient at a time. At Stanford Health Care, your career is supported within a distinctive hospital culture. This environment compliments the pioneering, collaborative atmosphere that has earned us our worldwide reputation for excellence.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 14,759
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Hospital Authority

Hospital Authority Building, Hong Kong, undefined, 852, HK
Last Update: 2025-11-21

The Hospital Authority (HA) is a statutory body established under the Hospital Authority Ordinance in 1990. We have been responsible for managing Hong Kong's public hospitals services since December 1991. We are accountable to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government through the Secretary for Health, who formulates overall health policies for Hong Kong and overseas the work of HA.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,255
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/stanford-health-care.jpeg
Stanford Health Care
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/hospital-authority.jpeg
Hospital Authority
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
Stanford Health Care
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Hospital Authority
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 Stanford Health Care in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Hospital Authority in 2025.

Incident History — Stanford Health Care (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Stanford Health Care cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Hospital Authority cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/stanford-health-care.jpeg
Stanford Health Care
Incidents

Date Detected: 5/2023
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Exploitation of MOVEit Transfer Server Vulnerability
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hospital-authority.jpeg
Hospital Authority
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Hospital Authority company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Stanford Health Care company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Stanford Health Care company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Hospital Authority company has not reported any.

In the current year, Hospital Authority company and Stanford Health Care company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Hospital Authority company nor Stanford Health Care company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Stanford Health Care company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Hospital Authority company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Hospital Authority company nor Stanford Health Care company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Stanford Health Care company nor Hospital Authority company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Stanford Health Care nor Hospital Authority holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Stanford Health Care company nor Hospital Authority company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Stanford Health Care company employs more people globally than Hospital Authority company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Stanford Health Care nor Hospital Authority holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Stanford Health Care nor Hospital Authority holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Stanford Health Care nor Hospital Authority holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Stanford Health Care nor Hospital Authority holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Stanford Health Care nor Hospital Authority holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Stanford Health Care nor Hospital Authority holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H