Comparison Overview
The Cigna Group
The Cigna Group
900 Cottage Grove Rd, Bloomfield, 06002, US
Last Update: 02/04/2026
The Cigna Group is a global health company committed to creating a better future built on the vitality of every individual and every community. We relentlessly challenge ourselves to partner and innovate solutions for better health. The Cigna Group includes products a...
Baylor Scott & White Health
3500 Gaston Ave, Dallas, 75246, US
Last Update: 03/04/2026
With us by your side, there's no stopping you. It's why we're creating a new kind of healthcare at Baylor Scott & White. And we're just getting started. As the largest not-for-profit health system in the state of Texas, Baylor Scott & White promotes the health and well...
Compliance Ranges Comparison
The Cigna Group
Baylor Scott & White Health
Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for The Cigna Group in 2026.
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Baylor Scott & White Health in 2026.
Incident History - The Cigna Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)
The Cigna Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Baylor Scott & White Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Baylor Scott & White Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents
The Cigna Group
Baylor Scott & White Health
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 5.0.0 through 5.0.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to exposure of session tokens in the HTML response.
IBM TRIRIGA Application Platform 5.0.0 through 5.0.8 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to an XML external entity (XXE) injection flaw.
IBM Aspera Enterprise WebApps 1.0.0 through 1.0.6 could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.
IBM Planning Analytics 2.0, and 2.1 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a stack-based buffer overflow.
IBM DataStage on Cloud Pak for Data 5.4.0.0 can allow a man-in-the-middle attacker to present a forged TLS certificate, intercept the connection, and capture the IAM bearer Authorization header automatically attached by the session adapter. The captured token grants full platform-scope tenant API access, enabling the attacker to read and manipulate the victim's DataStage projects, flows, assets, and pipeline definitions. This is client-side SDK code running on the user's own machine, so exploitation requires an external network interceptor rather than a co-tenant in the shared cluster.