Comparison Overview

Texas Health Resources

VS

NHS

Texas Health Resources

612 E Lamar Blvd, Arlington, US
Last Update: 2026-01-20

At Texas Health Resources, our mission is to improve the health of the people in the communities we serve. We are one of the largest faith-based, nonprofit health systems in the United States with a team of more than 28,000 employees of wholly owned/operated facilities and consolidated joint ventures in the greater Dallas Fort Worth area. Our career growth and professional development opportunities are top-notch and our benefits are equally outstanding. Join our award-winning Texas Health family and become a part of a team that is improving the health of our communities daily. You belong here. Let us brag for a minute on just a few of our recent accomplishments. • Fortune’s 100 Best Companies to Work For® 2025 • Business Group on Health Best Employers: Excellence in Health & Well-being Award 2025 • 20 Best Workplaces in Health Care by Great Place to Work® and Fortune 2025 • Companies That Care® by PEOPLE magazine and Great Place to Work® 2025 • America’s Best Large Employers by Forbes for 2025 • Fortune’s Best Workplaces for Women™ 2025 We are an Equal Opportunity Employer and do not discriminate against any employees or applicant for employment because of race, color, sex, age, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, status as a veteran, and basis of disability or any other federal, state or local protected class.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 16,844
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

NHS

undefined, undefined, undefined, undefined, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-21
Between 650 and 699

The NHS was launched in 1948. It was born out of a long-held ideal that good healthcare should be available to all, regardless of wealth – one of the NHS's core principles. With the exception of some charges, such as prescriptions, optical services and dental services, the NHS in England remains free at the point of use for all UK residents. This currently stands at more than 64.6 million people in the UK and 54.3 million people in England alone. The NHS in England deals with over 1 million patients every 36 hours. It covers everything, including antenatal screening, routine screenings (such as the NHS Health Check), treatments for long-term conditions, transplants, emergency treatment and end-of-life care. Responsibility for healthcare in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales is devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Scottish Government and the Welsh Assembly Government respectively. The NHS employs more than 1.5 million people, putting it in the top five of the world’s largest workforces, together with the US Department of Defence, McDonalds, Walmart and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. The NHS in England is the biggest part of the system by far, catering to a population of 54.3 million and employing around 1.2 million people. Of those, the clinically qualified staff include 150,273 doctors, 40,584 general practitioners (GPs), 314,966 nurses and health visitors, 18,862 ambulance staff, and 111,127 hospital and community health service (HCHS) medical and dental staff. The NHS in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland employs 161,415; 84,000 and 66,000 people respectively.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 238,427
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
3

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/texas-health-resources.jpeg
Texas Health Resources
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/nhs.jpeg
NHS
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
Texas Health Resources
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
NHS
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 Texas Health Resources in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for NHS in 2026.

Incident History — Texas Health Resources (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Texas Health Resources cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

NHS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/texas-health-resources.jpeg
Texas Health Resources
Incidents

Date Detected: 04/2018
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Email Account Compromise
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nhs.jpeg
NHS
Incidents

Date Detected: 12/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Exploitation of Oracle software vulnerability
Motivation: Financial gain, data exfiltration, reputational damage
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 05/2023
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Hidden Monitoring Feature
Motivation: Data Collection
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 08/2018
Type:Data Leak
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Texas Health Resources company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to NHS company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

NHS company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Texas Health Resources company.

In the current year, NHS company and Texas Health Resources company have not reported any cyber incidents.

NHS company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Texas Health Resources company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Texas Health Resources company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other NHS company has not reported such incidents publicly.

NHS company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Texas Health Resources company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Texas Health Resources company nor NHS company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Texas Health Resources nor NHS holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Texas Health Resources company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to NHS company.

NHS company employs more people globally than Texas Health Resources company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Texas Health Resources nor NHS holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Texas Health Resources nor NHS holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Texas Health Resources nor NHS holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Texas Health Resources nor NHS holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Texas Health Resources nor NHS holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Texas Health Resources nor NHS holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

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

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N