Comparison Overview

UMC Health System

VS

Northwestern Medicine

UMC Health System

602 Indiana Avenue, None, Lubbock, TX, US, 79415
Last Update: 2025-12-18

UMC Health System is comprised of over 4,600 team members who have made our organization “One of the Best Companies to Work for in Texas®” by Texas Monthly. Together with medical staff, volunteers, and leadership, we share a strong commitment to our patients—Our Passion is You! Why choose UMC? Because we are teaching the leaders of tomorrow while offering a culture of service today.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 1,914
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Northwestern Medicine

251 E Huron St, Chicago, 60611, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Northwestern Medicine is the collaboration between Northwestern Memorial HealthCare and Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine around a strategic vision to transform the future of health care. It encompasses the research, teaching, and patient care activities of the academic medical center. Sharing a commitment to superior quality, academic excellence and patient safety, the organizations within Northwestern Medicine comprise a combined workforce of more than 33,000 among clinical and administrative staff, medical and science faculty and medical students. Northwestern Medicine is comprised of more than 200 locations throughout the region, with five Northwestern Medicine hospitals ranked among “America's Best” by U.S. News & World Report, 2025 – 2026, our legacy of better medicine continues. What makes us better, makes you better.®

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 13,542
Subsidiaries: 4
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/umc-health-system.jpeg
UMC Health System
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/northwestern-medicine.jpeg
Northwestern Medicine
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
UMC Health System
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Northwestern Medicine
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 UMC Health System in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Northwestern Medicine in 2025.

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

UMC Health System cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Northwestern Medicine (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Northwestern Medicine cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/umc-health-system.jpeg
UMC Health System
Incidents

Date Detected: 10/2024
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/northwestern-medicine.jpeg
Northwestern Medicine
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2021
Type:Data Leak
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Northwestern Medicine company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to UMC Health System company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

UMC Health System and Northwestern Medicine have experienced a similar number of publicly disclosed cyber incidents.

In the current year, Northwestern Medicine company and UMC Health System company have not reported any cyber incidents.

UMC Health System company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while Northwestern Medicine company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Northwestern Medicine company nor UMC Health System company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Northwestern Medicine company nor UMC Health System company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither UMC Health System company nor Northwestern Medicine company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither UMC Health System nor Northwestern Medicine holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Northwestern Medicine company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to UMC Health System company.

Northwestern Medicine company employs more people globally than UMC Health System company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither UMC Health System nor Northwestern Medicine holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither UMC Health System nor Northwestern Medicine holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither UMC Health System nor Northwestern Medicine holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither UMC Health System nor Northwestern Medicine holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither UMC Health System nor Northwestern Medicine holds HIPAA certification.

Neither UMC Health System nor Northwestern Medicine holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Zerobyte is a backup automation tool Zerobyte versions prior to 0.18.5 and 0.19.0 contain an authentication bypass vulnerability where authentication middleware is not properly applied to API endpoints. This results in certain API endpoints being accessible without valid session credentials. This is dangerous for those who have exposed Zerobyte to be used outside of their internal network. A fix has been applied in both version 0.19.0 and 0.18.5. If immediate upgrade is not possible, restrict network access to the Zerobyte instance to trusted networks only using firewall rules or network segmentation. This is only a temporary mitigation; upgrading is strongly recommended.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Open Source Point of Sale (opensourcepos) is a web based point of sale application written in PHP using CodeIgniter framework. Starting in version 3.4.0 and prior to version 3.4.2, a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the application's filter configuration. The CSRF protection mechanism was **explicitly disabled**, allowing the application to process state-changing requests (POST) without verifying a valid CSRF token. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this by hosting a malicious web page. If a logged-in administrator visits this page, their browser is forced to send unauthorized requests to the application. A successful exploit allows the attacker to silently create a new Administrator account with full privileges, leading to a complete takeover of the system and loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The vulnerability has been patched in version 3.4.2. The fix re-enables the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` and resolves associated AJAX race conditions by adjusting token regeneration settings. As a workaround, administrators can manually re-enable the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` by uncommenting the protection line. However, this is not recommended without applying the full patch, as it may cause functionality breakage in the Sales module due to token synchronization issues.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Model Context Protocol (MCP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious MCP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered automatically without any user interaction besides opening the project in the IDE. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Language Server Protocol (LSP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious LSP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered when a user opens project file for which there is an LSP entry. A concerted effort by an attacker to seed a project settings file (`./zed/settings.json`) with malicious language server configurations could result in arbitrary code execution with the user's privileges if the user opens the project in Zed without reviewing the contents. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Storybook is a frontend workshop for building user interface components and pages in isolation. A vulnerability present starting in versions 7.0.0 and prior to versions 7.6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, and 10.1.10 relates to Storybook’s handling of environment variables defined in a `.env` file, which could, in specific circumstances, lead to those variables being unexpectedly bundled into the artifacts created by the `storybook build` command. When a built Storybook is published to the web, the bundle’s source is viewable, thus potentially exposing those variables to anyone with access. For a project to potentially be vulnerable to this issue, it must build the Storybook (i.e. run `storybook build` directly or indirectly) in a directory that contains a `.env` file (including variants like `.env.local`) and publish the built Storybook to the web. Storybooks built without a `.env` file at build time are not affected, including common CI-based builds where secrets are provided via platform environment variables rather than `.env` files. Storybook runtime environments (i.e. `storybook dev`) are not affected. Deployed applications that share a repo with your Storybook are not affected. Users should upgrade their Storybook—on both their local machines and CI environment—to version .6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, or 10.1.10 as soon as possible. Maintainers additionally recommend that users audit for any sensitive secrets provided via `.env` files and rotate those keys. Some projects may have been relying on the undocumented behavior at the heart of this issue and will need to change how they reference environment variables after this update. If a project can no longer read necessary environmental variable values, either prefix the variables with `STORYBOOK_` or use the `env` property in Storybook’s configuration to manually specify values. In either case, do not include sensitive secrets as they will be included in the built bundle.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L