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

Comparison Overview

Sutter Health - Bay AreaSutter Health - Bay Area
VS
Mount Sinai Health SystemMount Sinai Health System
Sutter Health - Bay Area

Sutter Health - Bay Area

San Francisco Bay Area, 94115, US

Last Update: 11/03/2026

View Profile

Sutter Bay Medical Foundation supports the growth and development of four affiliated medical groups spanning all regions of the San Francisco Bay Area: Palo Alto Foundation Medical Group Sansum Santa Barbara Medical Clinic, Inc Sutter East Bay Medical Group Sutter Med...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:1,370
Subsidiaries:1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
Mount Sinai Health System

Mount Sinai Health System

150 East 42nd Street, New York, NY, US, 10017

Last Update: 11/09/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.mountsinai.org/
796/1000Fair

The Mount Sinai Health System is an integrated health system committed to providing distinguished care, conducting transformative research, and advancing biomedical education. Structured around seven hospital campuses and a single medical school, the Health System has...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:29,627
Subsidiaries:12
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Sutter Health - Bay Area

Sutter Health - Bay Area

-
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
Mount Sinai Health System

Mount Sinai Health System

-
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 Sutter Health - Bay Area in 2026.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Mount Sinai Health System in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - Sutter Health - Bay Area (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Sutter Health - Bay Area cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Mount Sinai Health System (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Mount Sinai Health System cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Sutter Health - Bay Area

Sutter Health - Bay Area

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
Mount Sinai Health System

Mount Sinai Health System

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-90461
SUMMARY

OpenStack Ironic through 38.0.0 may send a username and password to an unexpected remote host when Image Service is configured for HTTP(S) Basic Authentication.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
4
EXPLOITABILITY
1.8
CVE-2026-90460
SUMMARY

An issue was discovered in OpenStack Keystone before 29.0.3. Tokens obtained via delegated authentication methods (EC2 credentials, application credentials, OAuth1 access tokens, and trusts) are not blocked from creating, modifying, or deleting credentials via the /v3/credentials API. EC2-derived tokens can additionally read credential blobs, exposing TOTP MFA seeds and other secrets. Also, PATCH /v3/credentials does not validate the requested post-update project_id, allowing any delegated token to move a credential to an unauthorized project. All Keystone deployments using delegated authentication are affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 7.6
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90457
SUMMARY

The administrative password is hashed using a comparatively weak, fast algorithm for the credential store backing one authentication path, and the file containing that hash is written with permissions allowing it to be read by any local user. This is inconsistent with a separate, stronger hashing algorithm used for the same password on another authentication path. A party able to read this file, including a local user or a party with access to a configuration backup, could feasibly recover the underlying password through offline computation, compromising the administrative credential across every path that accepts it.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.9
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90456
SUMMARY

An example environment-configuration file for a bundled inventory-management component ships with a fixed, publicly-known administrative password. A deployment that copies this example file into active configuration without running the setup routine that regenerates credentials will expose that component's administrative interface to anyone aware of the default value.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 9.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-90455
SUMMARY

A prior update that raised a bundled HTTP client library to a version remediating known vulnerabilities was later reverted, reintroducing the earlier, vulnerable version into a log-processing component. The only code path in that component using the library issues a request to a single fixed, trusted vendor URL at initialization and does not process attacker-controlled input through the library, limiting practical exploitability of the reintroduced version in this context.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-09-11
UPDATED
Date2026-09-11
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA