Comparison Overview

Vancouver Coastal Health

VS

RWJBarnabas Health

Vancouver Coastal Health

11th floor - 601 West Broadway, Vancouver, BC, CA, V5Z 4C2
Last Update: 2025-11-22
Between 750 and 799

Join a team connected by collaboration, support and most importantly, the goal of providing quality patient care. We value career growth with employer-supported training, encourage a culture where everyone’s voice is heard and strive to create a supportive team environment. To learn more, visit vch.ca/careers Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/VCHhealthcare/ Twitter - https://twitter.com/VCHhealthcare YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@VCHhealthcare Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/vchhealthcare/

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,971
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

RWJBarnabas Health

95 Old Short Hills Rd, West Orange, 07052, US
Last Update: 2025-11-20

RWJBarnabas Health is New Jersey’s largest and most comprehensive academic health system, caring for more than 5 million people annually. Nationally renowned for quality and safety, the system includes 14 hospitals and 9,000 affiliated physicians integrated to provide care at more than 700 patient care locations. RWJBarnabas Health is among New Jersey’s largest private employers, with more than 44,000 employees, contributing more than $5.5 billion to the state economy every year. RWJBarnabas Health partners with its diverse communities to build and sustain a healthier New Jersey. It provides patient-centered care in a compassionate and equitable manner. RWJBarnabas Health’s commitment to enhancing access to care includes a transformative partnership with Rutgers University, including the Rutgers Cancer Institute — the state's only NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center - and Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 24,556
Subsidiaries: 28
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/vancouver-coastal-health.jpeg
Vancouver Coastal 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/rwjbarnabashealth.jpeg
RWJBarnabas 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
Vancouver Coastal Health
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
RWJBarnabas 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 Vancouver Coastal Health in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for RWJBarnabas Health in 2025.

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

Vancouver Coastal Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

RWJBarnabas Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/vancouver-coastal-health.jpeg
Vancouver Coastal Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 05/2020
Type:Ransomware
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rwjbarnabashealth.jpeg
RWJBarnabas Health
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Vancouver Coastal Health company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas RWJBarnabas Health company has not reported any.

In the current year, RWJBarnabas Health company and Vancouver Coastal Health company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Vancouver Coastal Health company has confirmed experiencing a ransomware attack, while RWJBarnabas Health company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither RWJBarnabas Health company nor Vancouver Coastal Health company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither RWJBarnabas Health company nor Vancouver Coastal Health company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Vancouver Coastal Health company nor RWJBarnabas Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Vancouver Coastal Health nor RWJBarnabas Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

RWJBarnabas Health company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Vancouver Coastal Health company.

RWJBarnabas Health company employs more people globally than Vancouver Coastal Health company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Vancouver Coastal Health nor RWJBarnabas Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Vancouver Coastal Health nor RWJBarnabas Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Vancouver Coastal Health nor RWJBarnabas Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Vancouver Coastal Health nor RWJBarnabas Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Vancouver Coastal Health nor RWJBarnabas Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Vancouver Coastal Health nor RWJBarnabas 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