Blue Goat Risk Score
Blue Goat Cyber MedTech rubric v1.0 · methodology
3.0 base 8.0 · CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Life-threatening
No public exploit observed
8/10 network-reachable signals
How we got to 7.8
- 1CVSS technical severity (40%)
Industry-standard exploitability + impact score. We prefer CVSS 4.0 and fall back to 3.1 per the FDA's Feb 2026 premarket cybersecurity guidance. Missing CVSS scores get a neutral 4.0 so unknown vulns are not over- or under-rated.
3.0 base 8.0 × 40% = +3.20 - 2Patient safety impact (35%)
What happens to a patient if this vuln is exploited on a connected device. Auto-inferred from headline, dek, tags, and device class against a curated MedTech keyword library (pacemaker, infusion pump, EHR, PACS, etc.).
Life-threatening → 10 × 35% = +3.50 - 3Exploit maturity (15%)
Is anyone actually using this in attacks? KEV listing > weaponized exploit > public PoC > none. KEV alone forces tier=critical regardless of CVSS.
No public exploit observed → 2 × 15% = +0.30 - 4MedTech exposure (10%)
How likely this affects clinical operations: presence in our MedTech feed (+4 baseline), network-reachable signals (+3), known device-class tags (+2), identified MedTech vendor (+1).
Exposure 8/10 × 10% = +0.80
Tier cutoffs: Critical ≥ 8.5 · High 7.0–8.4 · Notable 4.0–6.9 · Info < 4.0. Full methodology, weights, and changelog at /goatfeed/risk-rubric.
Related Goat Feed analysis
Other items reviewed by the Blue Goat team.