Comparison Overview

Trinity Health

VS

Abbott

Trinity Health

20555 Victor Parkway, Livonia, MI, US, 48152
Last Update: 2025-11-20

Trinity Health is one of the largest not-for-profit, Catholic health care systems in the nation. It is a family of 123,000 colleagues and nearly 27,000 physicians and clinicians caring for diverse communities across 26 states. Nationally recognized for care and experience, the Trinity Health system includes 88 hospitals, 135 continuing care locations, the second largest PACE program in the country, 136 urgent care locations and many other health and well-being services. Based in Livonia, Michigan, its annual operating revenue is $21.5 billion with $1.4 billion returned to its communities in the form of charity care and other community benefit programs.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 16,726
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Abbott

100 Abbott Park Road, None, Abbott Park, Illinois, US, 60064-3500
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Abbott is a global healthcare leader that helps people live more fully at all stages of life. Our portfolio of life-changing technologies spans the spectrum of healthcare, with leading businesses and products in diagnostics, medical devices, nutritional and branded generic medicines. Our 114,000 colleagues serve people in more than 160 countries. Connect with us at www.abbott.com, on Facebook at www.facebook.com/Abbott and www.facebook.com/AbbottCareers, on Instagram @AbbottGlobal, and on X @AbbottNews. We invite you to explore opportunities at Abbott, to see if your talents and career aspirations may fit with our openings. An equal opportunity employer, Abbott welcomes and encourages diversity in our workforce. Terms of Use: https://www.abbott.com/social-media-terms-of-use.htm

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 147,646
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/trinityhealth.jpeg
Trinity Health
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/abbott-.jpeg
Abbott
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
Trinity Health
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Abbott
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 Trinity Health in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Abbott in 2025.

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

Trinity Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Abbott cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/trinityhealth.jpeg
Trinity Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access (Accellion File Transfer Appliance Vulnerability)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 1/2021
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Exploitation of vulnerability in Accellion File Transfer Appliance (FTA)
Motivation: Financial Gain, Data Theft
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 4/2020
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Cyber-attack on third-party network
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/abbott-.jpeg
Abbott
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2019
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Physical Loss (Misplaced Portable Drive)
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2014
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 6/2013
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

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

Trinity Health and Abbott have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Abbott company and Trinity Health company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Abbott company nor Trinity Health company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Abbott company and Trinity Health company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Both Abbott company and Trinity Health company have reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks.

Neither Trinity Health company nor Abbott company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Trinity Health nor Abbott holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Abbott company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Trinity Health company.

Abbott company employs more people globally than Trinity Health company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Trinity Health nor Abbott holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Trinity Health nor Abbott holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Trinity Health nor Abbott holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Trinity Health nor Abbott holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Trinity Health nor Abbott holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Trinity Health nor Abbott holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/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
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H