Comparison Overview

Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist

VS

Johnson & Johnson

Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist

Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC, US, 27157
Last Update: 2026-03-24
Between 700 and 749

Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist is a nationally recognized academic medical center and health system based in Winston-Salem, NC, part of Advocate Health, the third-largest nonprofit health system in the United States. Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist’s two main components are an integrated clinical system – anchored by Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, an 885-bed tertiary-care hospital in Winston-Salem – that includes Brenner Children’s Hospital, five community hospitals, more than 300 primary and specialty care locations and more than 2,700 physicians; and Wake Forest University School of Medicine, a recognized leader in experiential medical education and groundbreaking research. Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist and Wake Forest University School of Medicine are the academic core of Advocate Health. Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist employs more than 20,000 teammates, part of Advocate Health’s 150,000 teammates. Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist provided a record-setting $611.2 million in community benefits during the 2021 fiscal year, which includes unreimbursed care, charity care, education and research, and community health improvement.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 11,546
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Johnson & Johnson

New Brunswick, NJ, US, 08903
Last Update: 2026-03-28
Between 750 and 799

At Johnson & Johnson, we believe health is everything. Our strength in healthcare innovation empowers us to build a world where complex diseases are prevented, treated, and cured, where treatments are smarter and less invasive, and solutions are personal. Through our expertise in Innovative Medicine and MedTech, we are uniquely positioned to innovate across the full spectrum of healthcare solutions today to deliver the breakthroughs of tomorrow, and profoundly impact health for humanity. Learn more at https://www.jnj.com. Community Guidelines: http://www.jnj.com/social-media-community-guidelines

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 118,425
Subsidiaries: 5
12-month incidents
2
Known data breaches
5
Attack type number
2

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/atrium-health-wake-forest-baptist.jpeg
Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist
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/johnson-&-johnson.jpeg
Johnson & Johnson
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
Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Johnson & Johnson
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 Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist in 2026.

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

Johnson & Johnson has 40.85% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incident History — Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Johnson & Johnson (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Johnson & Johnson cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/atrium-health-wake-forest-baptist.jpeg
Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist
Incidents

Date Detected: 1/2025
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/johnson-&-johnson.jpeg
Johnson & Johnson
Incidents

Date Detected: 2/2026
Type:Cyber Attack
Attack Vector: Stolen credentials from Infostealer malware (RedLine, Raccoon, Vidar)
Motivation: Unauthorized access to corporate systems, data exfiltration, potential financial gain
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 2/2026
Type:Breach
Attack Vector: Stolen employee credentials via infostealer malware
Motivation: Network intrusion, data exfiltration, potential ransomware deployment
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 7/2025
Type:Breach
Motivation: Financial Gain
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Johnson & Johnson company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Johnson & Johnson company has faced a higher number of disclosed cyber incidents historically compared to Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company.

In the current year, Johnson & Johnson company has reported more cyber incidents than Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company.

Neither Johnson & Johnson company nor Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Both Johnson & Johnson company and Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company have disclosed experiencing at least one data breach.

Johnson & Johnson company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company nor Johnson & Johnson company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist nor Johnson & Johnson holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Johnson & Johnson company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company.

Johnson & Johnson company employs more people globally than Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist company, reflecting its scale as a Hospitals and Health Care.

Neither Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist nor Johnson & Johnson holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist nor Johnson & Johnson holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist nor Johnson & Johnson holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist nor Johnson & Johnson holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist nor Johnson & Johnson holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist nor Johnson & Johnson holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A vulnerability was identified in Totolink A3300R 17.0.0cu.557_b20221024. This affects the function setLanCfg of the file /cgi-bin/cstecgi.cgi of the component Parameter Handler. The manipulation of the argument lanIp leads to command injection. Remote exploitation of the attack is possible. The exploit is publicly available and might be used.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
AV:N/AC:L/Au:S/C:P/I:P/A:P
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: 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
Description

Perl versions from 5.9.4 before 5.40.4-RC1, from 5.41.0 before 5.42.2-RC1, from 5.43.0 before 5.43.9 contain a vulnerable version of Compress::Raw::Zlib. Compress::Raw::Zlib is included in the Perl package as a dual-life core module, and is vulnerable to CVE-2026-3381 due to a vendored version of zlib which has several vulnerabilities, including CVE-2026-27171. The bundled Compress::Raw::Zlib was updated to version 2.221 in Perl blead commit c75ae9cc164205e1b6d6dbd57bd2c65c8593fe94.

Description

Ghidra versions prior to 12.0.3 improperly process annotation directives embedded in automatically extracted binary data, resulting in arbitrary command execution when an analyst interacts with the UI. Specifically, the @execute annotation (which is intended for trusted, user-authored comments) is also parsed in comments generated during auto-analysis (such as CFStrings in Mach-O binaries). This allows a crafted binary to present seemingly benign clickable text which, when clicked, executes attacker-controlled commands on the analyst’s machine.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

A critical security vulnerability in parisneo/lollms versions up to 2.2.0 allows any authenticated user to accept or reject friend requests belonging to other users. The `respond_request()` function in `backend/routers/friends.py` does not implement proper authorization checks, enabling Insecure Direct Object Reference (IDOR) attacks. Specifically, the `/api/friends/requests/{friendship_id}` endpoint fails to verify whether the authenticated user is part of the friendship or the intended recipient of the request. This vulnerability can lead to unauthorized access, privacy violations, and potential social engineering attacks. The issue has been addressed in version 2.2.0.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
Description

A Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in parisneo/lollms versions prior to 2.2.0, specifically in the `/api/files/export-content` endpoint. The `_download_image_to_temp()` function in `backend/routers/files.py` fails to validate user-controlled URLs, allowing attackers to make arbitrary HTTP requests to internal services and cloud metadata endpoints. This vulnerability can lead to internal network access, cloud metadata access, information disclosure, port scanning, and potentially remote code execution.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N