Comparison Overview

Apollo Hospitals

VS

DaVita Kidney Care

Apollo Hospitals

Chennai, 600006, IN
Last Update: 2026-01-17

Driven by the vision of its Chairman, Dr. Prathap C. Reddy, the Apollo Hospitals Group pioneered corporate healthcare in India. Apollo revolutionized healthcare when Dr Prathap Reddy opened the first hospital in Chennai in 1983. Today Apollo is the world’s largest integrated healthcare platform with over 10,000 beds across 73 hospitals, over 6000 pharmacies and over 2500 clinics and diagnostic centers as well as 500+ telemedicine centers. Since its inception, Apollo has emerged as one of the world's premier cardiac centers, having conducted over 300,000+ angioplasties and 200,000+ surgeries. Apollo continues to invest in research to bring the most cutting-edge technologies, equipment and treatment protocols to ensure patients have the best available care in the world. Apollo’s 100,000 family members are dedicated to bringing you the best care and leaving the world better than we found it.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 37,617
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

DaVita Kidney Care

2000 16th Street, Denver, 80202, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 0 and 549

DaVita means “to give life,” reflecting our proud history as leaders in dialysis—an essential, life-sustaining treatment for those living with end stage kidney disease (ESKD). Today, our mission is to minimize the devastating impacts of kidney disease across the full spectrum of kidney health care. At DaVita, we’re a community first and a company second. We care for our teammates with the same intensity with which we care for our patients—and encourage our teammates to bring their hearts to work. That is, we can be the same people inside and outside of work because for us, it’s not work, it’s our passion. Interested in joining our Village? There are over 75,000 careers and counting. Visit careers.davita.com to start your career adventure.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 38,795
Subsidiaries: 8
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/theapollohospitals.jpeg
Apollo Hospitals
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/davita.jpeg
DaVita Kidney 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
Compliance Summary
Apollo Hospitals
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
DaVita Kidney Care
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 Apollo Hospitals in 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for DaVita Kidney Care in 2026.

Incident History — Apollo Hospitals (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Apollo Hospitals cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — DaVita Kidney Care (X = Date, Y = Severity)

DaVita Kidney Care cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/theapollohospitals.jpeg
Apollo Hospitals
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: DDoS, API Vulnerabilities, Employee Credential Theft, System Exploits, Cloud Attacks
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Theft, Disruption of Services, Espionage (Potential)
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/davita.jpeg
DaVita Kidney Care
Incidents

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Drive-by download from compromised legitimate websites, FileFix technique
Motivation: Financial gain through double extortion
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2025
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2025
Type:Ransomware
Attack Vector: Remote Access Trojan (RAT)
Motivation: Espionage, Double-extortion
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Apollo Hospitals company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to DaVita Kidney Care company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

DaVita Kidney Care company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Apollo Hospitals company.

In the current year, DaVita Kidney Care company and Apollo Hospitals company have not reported any cyber incidents.

DaVita Kidney Care company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Apollo Hospitals company has not reported such incidents publicly.

DaVita Kidney Care company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Apollo Hospitals company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Apollo Hospitals company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while DaVita Kidney Care company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Apollo Hospitals company nor DaVita Kidney Care company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Apollo Hospitals nor DaVita Kidney Care holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

DaVita Kidney Care company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Apollo Hospitals company.

DaVita Kidney Care company employs more people globally than Apollo Hospitals company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Apollo Hospitals nor DaVita Kidney Care holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Apollo Hospitals nor DaVita Kidney Care holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Apollo Hospitals nor DaVita Kidney Care holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Apollo Hospitals nor DaVita Kidney Care holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Apollo Hospitals nor DaVita Kidney Care holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Apollo Hospitals nor DaVita Kidney Care 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