Comparison Overview

Acacia Creek Retirement Community

VS

New England Homes for the Deaf

Acacia Creek Retirement Community

34400a Mission Blvd, Union City, California, 94587, US
Last Update: 2025-12-24
Between 750 and 799

Acacia Creek is a not-for-profit continuing care retirement community (CCRC), offering several levels of health care and support for vibrant living and successful aging. Our mission is to enrich the independence, well-being, and security of our residents through exceptional services and care based on Masonic values. Acacia Creek reflects and responds to the changing retirements of today’s seniors. We care for the whole person—mind, body, andy spirit—by offering a comprehensive array of recreational programs and supportive health care services. Our value-based pricing preserves the assets of residents and supports the health of our community. We partner with high-quality providers to ensure residents have access to the full range of care they deserve.

NAICS: 623
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 24
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

New England Homes for the Deaf

154-160 Water Street, Danvers, Massachusetts, 01923, US
Last Update: 2025-12-24
Between 750 and 799

New England Homes for the Deaf (NEHD), founded in 1901, is a life plan community that offers continuum of care to Deaf, Deafblind and hard of hearing seniors, including independent living, rest home, skilled nursing community, Deaf senior centers, short-term rehabilitation services, respite care services and hospice care. The New England Homes for the Deaf mission is to provide long term healthcare, housing, recreational activities and social support for Deaf, Deafblind and hard of hearing individuals in an accessible, barrier-free and culturally-sensitive environment with optimal communication and architectural resources.

NAICS: 623
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 47
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/acacia-creek-retirement-community.jpeg
Acacia Creek Retirement Community
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/new-england-homes-for-the-deaf-inc-..jpeg
New England Homes for the Deaf
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
Acacia Creek Retirement Community
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
New England Homes for the Deaf
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Nursing Homes and Residential Care Facilities Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Acacia Creek Retirement Community in 2025.

Incidents vs Nursing Homes and Residential Care Facilities Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for New England Homes for the Deaf in 2025.

Incident History — Acacia Creek Retirement Community (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Acacia Creek Retirement Community cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — New England Homes for the Deaf (X = Date, Y = Severity)

New England Homes for the Deaf cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/acacia-creek-retirement-community.jpeg
Acacia Creek Retirement Community
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/new-england-homes-for-the-deaf-inc-..jpeg
New England Homes for the Deaf
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

New England Homes for the Deaf company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Acacia Creek Retirement Community company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, New England Homes for the Deaf company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Acacia Creek Retirement Community company.

In the current year, New England Homes for the Deaf company and Acacia Creek Retirement Community company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither New England Homes for the Deaf company nor Acacia Creek Retirement Community company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither New England Homes for the Deaf company nor Acacia Creek Retirement Community company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither New England Homes for the Deaf company nor Acacia Creek Retirement Community company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community company nor New England Homes for the Deaf company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community nor New England Homes for the Deaf holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community company nor New England Homes for the Deaf company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

New England Homes for the Deaf company employs more people globally than Acacia Creek Retirement Community company, reflecting its scale as a Nursing Homes and Residential Care Facilities.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community nor New England Homes for the Deaf holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community nor New England Homes for the Deaf holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community nor New England Homes for the Deaf holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community nor New England Homes for the Deaf holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community nor New England Homes for the Deaf holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Acacia Creek Retirement Community nor New England Homes for the Deaf holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

httparty is an API tool. In versions 0.23.2 and prior, httparty is vulnerable to SSRF. This issue can pose a risk of leaking API keys, and it can also allow third parties to issue requests to internal servers. This issue has been patched via commit 0529bcd.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:L/VA:N/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

5ire is a cross-platform desktop artificial intelligence assistant and model context protocol client. In versions 0.15.2 and prior, an RCE vulnerability exists in useMarkdown.ts, where the markdown-it-mermaid plugin is initialized with securityLevel: 'loose'. This configuration explicitly permits the rendering of HTML tags within Mermaid diagram nodes. This issue has not been patched at time of publication.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

continuwuity is a Matrix homeserver written in Rust. Prior to version 0.5.0, this vulnerability allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to force the target server to cryptographically sign arbitrary membership events. The flaw exists because the server fails to validate the origin of a signing request, provided the event's state_key is a valid user ID belonging to the target server. This issue has been patched in version 0.5.0. A workaround for this issue involves blocking access to the PUT /_matrix/federation/v2/invite/{roomId}/{eventId} endpoint using the reverse proxy.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:L/SA:L/E:X/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

LangChain is a framework for building LLM-powered applications. Prior to @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and prior to langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain JS's toJSON() method (and subsequently when string-ifying objects using JSON.stringify(). The method did not escape objects with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form data in kwargs. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in @langchain/core versions 0.3.80 and 1.1.8, and langchain versions 0.3.37 and 1.2.3

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N
Description

LangChain is a framework for building agents and LLM-powered applications. Prior to versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5, a serialization injection vulnerability exists in LangChain's dumps() and dumpd() functions. The functions do not escape dictionaries with 'lc' keys when serializing free-form dictionaries. The 'lc' key is used internally by LangChain to mark serialized objects. When user-controlled data contains this key structure, it is treated as a legitimate LangChain object during deserialization rather than plain user data. This issue has been patched in versions 0.3.81 and 1.2.5.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N