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

Comparison Overview

Universitätsklinikum FreiburgUniversitätsklinikum Freiburg
VS
Kaiser PermanenteKaiser Permanente
Universitätsklinikum Freiburg

Universitätsklinikum Freiburg

Hugstetter Strasse 55, Freiburg, 79106, DE

Last Update: 22/05/2026

View Profile
690/1000Weak

Das Universitätsklinikum Freiburg gehört als Krankenhaus der Maximalversorgung mit gut 15.000 Mitarbeiter*innen zu den größten Universitätskliniken Deutschlands. Rund 1.400 Ärzt*innen sowie 3.100 Pflegekräfte versorgen pro Jahr rund 73.000 Patient*innen stationär sowie ...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:2,298
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1
Kaiser Permanente

Kaiser Permanente

1 Kaiser Plaza, Oakland, 94612, US

Last Update: 04/04/2026

View Profile
Between 0 and 549
http://kp.org
194/1000Critical

At the heart of health care, you’ll find Kaiser Permanente. As the nation’s leading not-for-profit, integrated health plan, we make a difference in the lives of members, patients, and communities across the country. With 39 hospitals and more than 734 locations in eig...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:138,167
Subsidiaries:2
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
15
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Universitätsklinikum Freiburg

Universitätsklinikum Freiburg

-
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
Kaiser Permanente

Kaiser Permanente

-
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)

Universitätsklinikum Freiburg has 29.08% fewer 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)

Kaiser Permanente has 4.76% fewer incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Universitätsklinikum Freiburg (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Universitätsklinikum Freiburg cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - Kaiser Permanente (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Kaiser Permanente cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
Universitätsklinikum Freiburg

Universitätsklinikum Freiburg

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
HEIUNIUNIUNIUNI1779453682
Kaiser Permanente

Kaiser Permanente

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
KAI1768267117
🔒 Incident : Breach
KAI603072625
🔒 Incident : Breach
KAI004032225

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-16197
SUMMARY

A security vulnerability has been detected in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. The affected element is the function handleMessageReceive of the file pkg/channels/feishu/feishu_64.go of the component Group Message Handler. Such manipulation leads to missing authorization. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16196
SUMMARY

A weakness has been identified in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. Impacted is the function isPrivateOrRestrictedIP of the file pkg/tools/integration/web.go of the component web_fetch. This manipulation causes server-side request forgery. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been made available to the public and could be used for attacks. Patch name: 2efbe5d560e7ed9bc5209c203dc4aa6ecdbc7405. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-16195
SUMMARY

A security flaw has been discovered in Sipeed PicoClaw up to 0.2.9. This issue affects the function dispatchIncoming of the file pkg/channels/wecom/wecom.go of the component Group Message Handler. The manipulation results in incorrect authorization. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been released to the public and may be used for attacks. The reported GitHub issue was closed automatically due to inactivity.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8
CVE-2026-10130
SUMMARY

QueryWeaver contains an authentication bypass vulnerability that allows unauthenticated attackers to obtain valid session tokens for existing accounts by submitting a signup request with a known victim email address. The signup route unconditionally creates and links a new token to the matching Identity via a Cypher MERGE operation before checking whether the email belongs to an existing account, causing the server to return a valid authenticated session token for the victim's identity without requiring any prior credentials or user interaction.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.2)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.2
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
CVSS4
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/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
IMPACT SCORE
4.2
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-16194
SUMMARY

A vulnerability was determined in zhayujie CowAgent up to 2.1.1. This affects the function WebFetch.execute of the file agent/tools/web_fetch/web_fetch.py. Executing a manipulation of the argument url can lead to server-side request forgery. The attack may be performed from remote. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. Upgrading to version 2.1.2 is able to mitigate this issue. This patch is called ea47f3097eed4f8295c4cb3d76ecb97e0f43d632. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component. The vendor was contacted early, responded in a very professional manner and quickly released a fixed version of the affected product.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-18
UPDATED
Date2026-07-18
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 6.3)
CVSS2
Base Score: 6.5
Complexity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
CVSS3
Base Score: 6.3
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
CVSS4
Base Score: 2.1
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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
IMPACT SCORE
3.4
EXPLOITABILITY
2.8