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

Comparison Overview

The Craneware GroupThe Craneware Group
VS
Cincinnati Children'sCincinnati Children's
The Craneware Group

The Craneware Group

600 W Hillsboro Blvd, Deerfield Beach, 33441, US

Last Update: 20/07/2026

View Profile
697/1000Weak

For over 25 years, The Craneware Group has led healthcare financial and operational transformation with innovative technologies that drive measurable results. Our Trisus® cloud ecosystem integrates data, value cycle intelligence, and advanced analytics, helping healthca...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:779
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
1
Cincinnati Children's

Cincinnati Children's

US

Last Update: 31/03/2026

View Profile
785/1000Fair

Cincinnati Children’s, a nonprofit academic medical center established in 1883, offers services from well-child care to treatment for the most rare and complex conditions. It is the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine and trains ...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:16,334
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
The Craneware Group

The Craneware Group

-
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
Cincinnati Children's

Cincinnati Children's

-
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)

The Craneware Group has 41.84% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

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

No incidents recorded for Cincinnati Children's in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - The Craneware Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Craneware Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Cincinnati Children's (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cincinnati Children's 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...
The Craneware Group

The Craneware Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
THE1784535979
🔒 Incident : Breach
CRA1784535812
Cincinnati Children's

Cincinnati Children's

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-105761
SUMMARY

Dify is an open-source LLM app development platform. Prior to 1.16.0, the PUT /console/api/apps/<app_id>/server endpoint in api/controllers/console/app/mcp_server.py used AppMCPServerController.put() to retrieve an AppMCPServer by the client-supplied server ID without verifying that the server belonged to the requested application and tenant. An authenticated workspace member could therefore change another application's MCP server status and parameters, potentially redirecting data or disabling the service. This issue is fixed in version 1.16.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.1)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-105760
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, a caller can use the request-level media_io_kwargs field to select the GLMGA video backend and supply large values for the fps and max_frames options without a strict work ceiling. GLMGA constructs and deduplicates an attacker-sized pre-decode frame-index list, allowing a compact request and tiny valid video to consume disproportionate CPU time and memory in the shared media-loading executor. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105759
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, the Rust frontend's track_http_metrics middleware records the raw HTTP method token as a Prometheus label for requests reaching registered routes. An unauthenticated attacker can send unique arbitrary method tokens to unguarded routes such as /tokenize, causing Prometheus's Family::get_or_create function to permanently create counter and histogram label sets. Those label sets increase process memory usage and enlarge the /metrics response until the service or monitoring path is exhausted. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.9)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.9
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-105758
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. From 0.24.0 until 0.30.0, the Qwen2VLVideoBackend and Qwen3VLVideoBackend classes accept request-level values for the media_io_kwargs.video.max_frames and media_io_kwargs.video.fps fields without enforcing server-side ceilings. An unauthenticated caller can submit these values to the /tokenize endpoint, causing the sampler to decode every frame selected from attacker-controlled video input, consume disproportionate frontend memory, and potentially terminate the API process before scheduling or admission control. The Rust frontend is not affected because it rejects the media_io_kwargs field. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 5.3)
CVSS3
Base Score: 5.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
IMPACT SCORE
1.4
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-105757
SUMMARY

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models. Prior to 0.30.0, structured-output request failures can escape request-scoped validation and reach the EngineCore fatal-error path. A per-request backend mismatch can re-raise a grammar compilation exception, padding produced by the ngram_gpu speculative-decoding mode can pass a negative token to guidance validation, and the Rust frontend can admit empty structured-output values that the Python frontend rejects, allowing ordinary constrained-generation requests to terminate the shared engine. This issue is fixed in version 0.30.0.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-05
UPDATED
Date2026-10-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8