Comparison Overview

The University of Texas Medical Branch

VS

UT Southwestern Medical Center

The University of Texas Medical Branch

301 University Blvd, Galveston, Texas, US, 77550
Last Update: 2026-03-29
Between 750 and 799

The first academic health center in Texas opened its doors in 1891 and today has four campuses, five health sciences schools, seven 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: 11,743
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

UT Southwestern Medical Center

5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, Texas, US, 75390
Last Update: 2026-03-27

UT Southwestern is an academic medical center, world-renowned for its research, regarded among the best in the country for medical education and for clinical and scientific training, and nationally recognized for the quality of care its faculty provides to patients at UT Southwestern’s University Hospital & Clinics and affiliated institutions. The Medical Center includes three degree-granting institutions: UT Southwestern Medical School, UT Southwestern Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, and UT Southwestern School of Health Professions. - The schools train nearly 3,700 medical, graduate, and health profession students, residents, and postdoctoral fellows each year. - Ongoing support from federal agencies, along with foundations, individuals, and corporations, provides more than $524 million per year to fund faculty research. - UT Southwestern physicians provide care in about 80 specialties to more than 117,000 hospitalized patients, more than 360,000 emergency room cases, and oversee nearly 3 million outpatient visits a year. - UT Southwestern has approximately 25,000 employees and an operating budget of $3.7 billion. - UT Southwestern is the #1 hospital in Dallas-Fort Worth for the ninth year in a row, according to U.S. News & World Report. In addition, 12 of our specialties are nationally ranked for 2025-2026 – the most of any hospital in Texas. Those specialties include: Cancer; Cardiology, Heart & Vascular Surgery; Diabetes & Endocrinology; Gastroenterology & GI Surgery; Geriatrics; Neurology & Neurosurgery; Obstetrics & Gynecology; Orthopedics; Otolaryngology – Ear, Nose & Throat; Pulmonology & Lung Surgery; Rehabilitation; and Urology.

NAICS: 62
NAICS Definition: Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees: 18,678
Subsidiaries: 13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

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/utsw.jpeg
UT Southwestern Medical Center
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
UT Southwestern Medical Center
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 2026.

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

No incidents recorded for UT Southwestern Medical Center in 2026.

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 — UT Southwestern Medical Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UT Southwestern Medical Center 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/utsw.jpeg
UT Southwestern Medical Center
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, UT Southwestern Medical Center company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to The University of Texas Medical Branch company.

In the current year, UT Southwestern Medical Center company and The University of Texas Medical Branch company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither UT Southwestern Medical Center company nor The University of Texas Medical Branch company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither UT Southwestern Medical Center company nor The University of Texas Medical Branch company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither UT Southwestern Medical Center company nor The University of Texas Medical Branch company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch company nor UT Southwestern Medical Center company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor UT Southwestern Medical Center holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

UT Southwestern Medical Center company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to The University of Texas Medical Branch company.

UT Southwestern Medical Center 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 UT Southwestern Medical Center holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor UT Southwestern Medical Center holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor UT Southwestern Medical Center holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor UT Southwestern Medical Center holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor UT Southwestern Medical Center holds HIPAA certification.

Neither The University of Texas Medical Branch nor UT Southwestern Medical Center 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