Comparison Overview

212 Behavioral, LLC

VS

Common Threads Project

212 Behavioral, LLC

27o7 Airport Freeway, Suite 215, Fort Worth, Texas 76111, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Most parents struggle knowing how to deal with their kid's difficult behaviors. We help parents squash problem behaviors like aggression, defiance & separation anxiety. So that they can have peace in their parenting & in their home. An in-home system designed by licensed therapist for children who are having behavioral problems at home and at school.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 2
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Common Threads Project

25 Plaza St. West, Brooklyn, New York, 11217, US
Last Update: 2025-12-11

Common Threads offers a psychosocial recovery program for women who have survived gender-based violence, war, and displacement. In many cultures when women have faced unspeakable atrocities, they've come together to share their experiences, to support one another, and to sew their stories onto cloth as a means to find their way out of despair. Common Threads gathers women to sew story cloths and recover from trauma together, integrating contemporary evidence-based trauma treatment with traditional practices that have enabled communities to promote healing and resilience. Common Threads -builds community capacity to provide psychosocial support for survivors of violence -develops culturally responsive interventions in collaboration with local partners -integrates traditional practices with contemporary trauma treatments -promotes survivors’ strengths rather than treating their “pathology"​ -empowers participants as they make their way from victims to survivors to agents of change In 2012, Common Threads’ pilot project was established in Lago Agrio, Ecuador, in collaboration with UNHCR and local partners Taller de Communicacion de Mujer and The Women’s Federation of Sucumbios. In 2014 we partnered with TPO Nepal and UNHCR to establish Common Threads Nepal, serving Bhutanese and Pakistani refugee women in Damak and Kathmandu. An additional project was launched in Bosnia in 2016, in urban and rural settings in and around Zenica, Tuzla, and Bihać. Our most recent expansion is in Democratic Republic of the Congo, in partnership with the Dr. Denis Mukwege Foundation and Panzi Hospital.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 14
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/212-behavioral.jpeg
212 Behavioral, LLC
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/common-threads-project.jpeg
Common Threads Project
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
212 Behavioral, LLC
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Common Threads Project
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for 212 Behavioral, LLC in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Common Threads Project in 2026.

Incident History — 212 Behavioral, LLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

212 Behavioral, LLC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Common Threads Project (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Common Threads Project cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/212-behavioral.jpeg
212 Behavioral, LLC
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/common-threads-project.jpeg
Common Threads Project
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

212 Behavioral, LLC company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Common Threads Project company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Common Threads Project company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to 212 Behavioral, LLC company.

In the current year, Common Threads Project company and 212 Behavioral, LLC company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Common Threads Project company nor 212 Behavioral, LLC company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Common Threads Project company nor 212 Behavioral, LLC company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Common Threads Project company nor 212 Behavioral, LLC company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC company nor Common Threads Project company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC nor Common Threads Project holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC company nor Common Threads Project company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Common Threads Project company employs more people globally than 212 Behavioral, LLC company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC nor Common Threads Project holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC nor Common Threads Project holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC nor Common Threads Project holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC nor Common Threads Project holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC nor Common Threads Project holds HIPAA certification.

Neither 212 Behavioral, LLC nor Common Threads Project holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/backend-defaults provides the default implementations and setup for a standard Backstage backend app. Prior to versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0, the `FetchUrlReader` component, used by the catalog and other plugins to fetch content from URLs, followed HTTP redirects automatically. This allowed an attacker who controls a host listed in `backend.reading.allow` to redirect requests to internal or sensitive URLs that are not on the allowlist, bypassing the URL allowlist security control. This is a Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability that could allow access to internal resources, but it does not allow attackers to include additional request headers. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` version 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Restrict `backend.reading.allow` to only trusted hosts that you control and that do not issue redirects, ensure allowed hosts do not have open redirect vulnerabilities, and/or use network-level controls to block access from Backstage to sensitive internal endpoints.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.5
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals, and @backstage/cli-common provides config loading functionality used by the backend and command line interface of Backstage. Prior to version 0.1.17, the `resolveSafeChildPath` utility function in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api`, which is used to prevent path traversal attacks, failed to properly validate symlink chains and dangling symlinks. An attacker could bypass the path validation via symlink chains (creating `link1 → link2 → /outside` where intermediate symlinks eventually resolve outside the allowed directory) and dangling symlinks (creating symlinks pointing to non-existent paths outside the base directory, which would later be created during file operations). This function is used by Scaffolder actions and other backend components to ensure file operations stay within designated directories. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-plugin-api` version 0.1.17. Users should upgrade to this version or later. Some workarounds are available. Run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access and/or restrict template creation to trusted users.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

Backstage is an open framework for building developer portals. Multiple Scaffolder actions and archive extraction utilities were vulnerable to symlink-based path traversal attacks. An attacker with access to create and execute Scaffolder templates could exploit symlinks to read arbitrary files via the `debug:log` action by creating a symlink pointing to sensitive files (e.g., `/etc/passwd`, configuration files, secrets); delete arbitrary files via the `fs:delete` action by creating symlinks pointing outside the workspace, and write files outside the workspace via archive extraction (tar/zip) containing malicious symlinks. This affects any Backstage deployment where users can create or execute Scaffolder templates. This vulnerability is fixed in `@backstage/backend-defaults` versions 0.12.2, 0.13.2, 0.14.1, and 0.15.0; `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-backend` versions 2.2.2, 3.0.2, and 3.1.1; and `@backstage/plugin-scaffolder-node` versions 0.11.2 and 0.12.3. Users should upgrade to these versions or later. Some workarounds are available. Follow the recommendation in the Backstage Threat Model to limit access to creating and updating templates, restrict who can create and execute Scaffolder templates using the permissions framework, audit existing templates for symlink usage, and/or run Backstage in a containerized environment with limited filesystem access.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:L
Description

FastAPI Api Key provides a backend-agnostic library that provides an API key system. Version 1.1.0 has a timing side-channel vulnerability in verify_key(). The method applied a random delay only on verification failures, allowing an attacker to statistically distinguish valid from invalid API keys by measuring response latencies. With enough repeated requests, an adversary could infer whether a key_id corresponds to a valid key, potentially accelerating brute-force or enumeration attacks. All users relying on verify_key() for API key authentication prior to the fix are affected. Users should upgrade to version 1.1.0 to receive a patch. The patch applies a uniform random delay (min_delay to max_delay) to all responses regardless of outcome, eliminating the timing correlation. Some workarounds are available. Add an application-level fixed delay or random jitter to all authentication responses (success and failure) before the fix is applied and/or use rate limiting to reduce the feasibility of statistical timing attacks.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 3.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

The Flux Operator is a Kubernetes CRD controller that manages the lifecycle of CNCF Flux CD and the ControlPlane enterprise distribution. Starting in version 0.36.0 and prior to version 0.40.0, a privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the Flux Operator Web UI authentication code that allows an attacker to bypass Kubernetes RBAC impersonation and execute API requests with the operator's service account privileges. In order to be vulnerable, cluster admins must configure the Flux Operator with an OIDC provider that issues tokens lacking the expected claims (e.g., `email`, `groups`), or configure custom CEL expressions that can evaluate to empty values. After OIDC token claims are processed through CEL expressions, there is no validation that the resulting `username` and `groups` values are non-empty. When both values are empty, the Kubernetes client-go library does not add impersonation headers to API requests, causing them to be executed with the flux-operator service account's credentials instead of the authenticated user's limited permissions. This can result in privilege escalation, data exposure, and/or information disclosure. Version 0.40.0 patches the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.3
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N