Comparison Overview
Ottobock Care (Wright & Filippis)

Ottobock Care (Wright & Filippis)
2845 Crooks Road, None, Rochester Hills, Michigan, US, 48309
Last Update: 05/04/2026
Since 1944, Wright & Filippis has built a well-earned reputation as a leader in prosthetics, orthotics, custom mobility products and accessibility solutions. We are over 70 years strong, and now more than ever we are reminded of our ongoing commitment to improve the li...

Hapvida NotreDame Intermédica
Av. Paulista 867, São Paulo, 01311-100, BR
Last Update: 05/09/2026
Com 80 anos de experiência, a Hapvida é hoje a maior empresa de saúde integrada da América Latina. A companhia, que possui mais de 73 mil colaboradores, atende 16 milhões de beneficiários de saúde e odontologia espalhados pelas cinco regiões do Brasil. Todo o aparato ...
Compliance Ranges Comparison

Ottobock Care (Wright & Filippis)







Hapvida NotreDame Intermédica






Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Ottobock Care (Wright & Filippis) in 2026.
Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)
No incidents recorded for Hapvida NotreDame Intermédica in 2026.
Incident History - Ottobock Care (Wright & Filippis) (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Ottobock Care (Wright & Filippis) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Incident History - Hapvida NotreDame Intermédica (X = Date, Y = Severity)
Hapvida NotreDame Intermédica cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.
Notable Incidents

Ottobock Care (Wright & Filippis)

Hapvida NotreDame Intermédica
FAQ
Latest Global CVEs
Heym from 0.0.55 before 0.0.121 contains a privilege escalation vulnerability that allows shared collaborators to overwrite a workflow's error_workflow_id because the field is missing from OWNER_ONLY_EXECUTION_FIELDS. Attackers can point the error workflow to their own workflow with an HTTP node, and when the parent workflow errors the owner's decrypted credentials are injected and exfiltrated.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a quadratic complexity denial of service vulnerability in the SMTP client reply parser in SMTPConnection._onData and isPartialResponse. A malicious SMTP server or on-path attacker can stream continuation lines without a completion line before authentication, blocking the Node.js event loop and exhausting memory.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.10 contains a denial of service vulnerability in MessageParser.parseHeaders that allows users to exhaust CPU through quadratic header unfolding. Attackers can supply large recipient lists or long headers that fold into tens of thousands of continuation lines, blocking the Node.js event loop during DKIM signing.
Nodemailer from 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 contains an improper input validation vulnerability in its address parser that fails to strip RFC 5322 comments inside angle-bracket addresses. Attackers can supply recipients like a display name with a parenthesized comment in the domain, so illegal characters reach envelope.to and RCPT TO, causing rejected delivery or parser interpretation conflicts that bypass domain allow-lists.
Nodemailer 3.0.0 before 10.0.13 has a regular expression denial of service in SMTPConnection._actionEHLO, whose four AUTH mechanism detection regexes contain overlapping whitespace sub-patterns that backtrack quadratically. A malicious or man-in-the-middle SMTP server can reply to EHLO with 250-AUTH, a long whitespace run and a non-matching token, blocking the Node.js event loop for tens of seconds to hours before authentication.