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

Comparison Overview

Visiting Physician Services (VPS)Visiting Physician Services (VPS)
VS
McKessonMcKesson
Visiting Physician Services (VPS)

Visiting Physician Services (VPS)

Based in Neptune, New Jersey. We serve Bergen, Passaic, Essex, Union, Middlesex, Eastern Somerset, Monmouth, and Ocean Counties., US

Last Update: 18/03/2026

View Profile
Between 650 and 699
http://vnahg.org/vps
696/1000Weak

Visiting Physician Services (VPS) is a home-based primary care practice with over 30 years of experience bringing compassionate medical care directly to older adults and homebound patients. By delivering care through house calls, VPS ensures patients live comfortably an...

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

McKesson

6555 State Highway 161, Irving, 75039, US

Last Update: 07/10/2026

View Profile

Welcome to the official LinkedIn page for McKesson Corporation. Our purpose is Advancing Health Outcomes for All®. Guided by a nearly 200-year legacy, we work with biopharma companies, providers, pharmacies, manufacturers, government entities and others to strengthen ...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:25,352
Subsidiaries:11
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
2
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
Visiting Physician Services (VPS)

Visiting Physician Services (VPS)

-
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
McKesson

McKesson

-
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)

Visiting Physician Services (VPS) 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)

McKesson has 98.02% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - Visiting Physician Services (VPS) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Visiting Physician Services (VPS) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

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

Incident History - McKesson (X = Date, Y = Severity)

McKesson 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...
Visiting Physician Services (VPS)

Visiting Physician Services (VPS)

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
VPS1773853243
McKesson

McKesson

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Breach
SALMCK1787948754
🔒 Incident : Breach
MCK1789021407
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
MCK1788385186

FAQ

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

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-97626
SUMMARY

Requesting a user or organization profile page (`GET /{username}`) with an `Accept: application/rss+xml` or `Accept: application/atom+xml` header returned the owner's activity feed without the visibility check that the profile page and the `.rss` and `.atom` routes apply. Anonymous users, restricted users and non-members could confirm the existence of limited or private users and private organizations and read their profile details and public activity, also when `[other] ENABLE_FEED` was disabled. Activity in private repositories was not included.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-97208
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint for creating push mirrors (`POST /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/push_mirrors`) checked only whether mirroring was enabled and not the `[mirror] DISABLE_NEW_PUSH` setting that the web interface enforces. A repository administrator could therefore create new push mirrors on instances where the site administrator had disabled them. A push mirror pushes all refs of the repository to a remote chosen by the caller, on each commit or on a schedule.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-96594
SUMMARY

The Gitea API endpoint `GET /api/v1/repos/{owner}/{repo}/media/{filepath}` wrote files of up to 1 KiB that are stored directly in Git, not in LFS, to the response without the content type and disposition headers Gitea uses for user content. An HTML file committed to a repository was therefore rendered by the browser on the Gitea origin. A user who can push to a repository could run JavaScript in the session of a victim who opens the media URL and act with the victim's permissions.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-89182
SUMMARY

With `[repository] FORCE_PRIVATE = true`, Gitea creates new repositories as private, but the post-receive hook still applied the `repo.private=false` push option to an empty repository created by push. Any user who can create repositories could make their new repository public in violation of the instance policy. The default configuration is not affected.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-86684
SUMMARY

The Gitea push mirror API checked whether the repository owner, instead of the requesting user, may use local file system paths. On instances with `[security] IMPORT_LOCAL_PATHS = true`, a repository administrator who is not allowed to import local paths could add a push mirror to a local path on the server when the repository owner has that permission. Gitea then pushed the repository's refs into an existing Git repository at that path with the permissions of the Gitea process.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-10-06
UPDATED
Date2026-10-06
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA