Comparison Overview

The University of Texas Medical Branch

VS

SSM Health

The University of Texas Medical Branch

301 University Blvd, Galveston, Texas, 77550, US
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 750 and 799

ABOUT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MEDICAL BRANCH: Texas' first academic health center opened its doors in 1891 and today has four campuses, five health sciences schools, six institutes for advanced study, a research enterprise that includes one of only two national laboratories dedicated to the safe study of infectious threats to human health, a Level 1 Trauma Center and a health system offering a full range of primary and specialized medical services throughout the Texas Gulf Coast region. UTMB is an institution in the University of Texas System and a member of the Texas Medical Center.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,065
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

SSM Health

10101 Woodfield Ln, St Louis, Missouri, US, 63132
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 700 and 749

SSM Health is a Catholic, not-for-profit, fully integrated health system dedicated to advancing innovative, sustainable, and compassionate care for patients and communities throughout the Midwest and beyond. The organization’s 40,000 team members and 13,900 providers are committed to fulfilling SSM Health’s Mission: “Through our exceptional health care services, we reveal the healing presence of God.” With care delivery sites in Illinois, Missouri, Oklahoma and Wisconsin, SSM Health includes hospitals, physician offices, outpatient and virtual care services, comprehensive home care and hospice services, a fully transparent pharmacy benefit company, a health insurance company and an accountable care organization. It is one of the largest employers in every community it serves. For more information, visit ssmhealth.com Visit jobs.ssmhealth.com to fulfill your calling with SSM Health. Together – We Care.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 19,235
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
1
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/utmb.jpeg
The University of Texas Medical Branch
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/ssm-health-care.jpeg
SSM 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
Compliance Summary
The University of Texas Medical Branch
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
SSM Health
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 The University of Texas Medical Branch in 2025.

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

SSM Health has 33.33% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — The University of Texas Medical Branch (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The University of Texas Medical Branch cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

SSM Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/utmb.jpeg
The University of Texas Medical Branch
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ssm-health-care.jpeg
SSM Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 12/2020
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Unauthorized Access/Disclosure
Blog: Blog

FAQ

The University of Texas Medical Branch company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to SSM Health company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

SSM Health company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas The University of Texas Medical Branch company has not reported any.

In the current year, SSM Health company has reported more cyber incidents than The University of Texas Medical Branch company.

Neither SSM Health company nor The University of Texas Medical Branch company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

SSM Health company has disclosed at least one data breach, while The University of Texas Medical Branch company has not reported such incidents publicly.

SSM Health company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while The University of Texas Medical Branch company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch company nor SSM Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor SSM Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch company nor SSM Health company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

SSM Health company employs more people globally than The University of Texas Medical Branch company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor SSM Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor SSM Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor SSM Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor SSM Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor SSM Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor SSM Health 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