Comparison Overview

AgriSafe Network

VS

American Patient Rights Association

AgriSafe Network

8342 NICC Drive, Peosta, 52068, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

AgriSafe is an international 501©3 organization representing health and safety professionals who strive to reduce health disparities found among the agricultural community. Our mission is to support a growing network of trained agricultural health and safety professionals that assure access to preventative services for farm families and the agricultural community. Our impact is realized across the globe because we utilize web-based technology to deliver the best trainings by experts in the field.

NAICS: 92312
NAICS Definition: Administration of Public Health Programs
Employees: 27
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

American Patient Rights Association

undefined, Mount Dora, FL, 32757, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

American Patient Rights Association (APRA) is a nonprofit consumer organization, advocating for safety, fairness and transparency in healthcare. Based in Florida, APRA is dedicated to empowering, informing and educating health-care consumers, and advocating and agitating for improved health-care safety, costs, accountability, transparency and patient rights. Visit AmericanPatient.org for further information.

NAICS: 92312
NAICS Definition: Administration of Public Health Programs
Employees: 1
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/agrisafe-network.jpeg
AgriSafe Network
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/american-patient-rights-association.jpeg
American Patient Rights Association
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
AgriSafe Network
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
American Patient Rights Association
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Public Health Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AgriSafe Network in 2025.

Incidents vs Public Health Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for American Patient Rights Association in 2025.

Incident History — AgriSafe Network (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AgriSafe Network cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — American Patient Rights Association (X = Date, Y = Severity)

American Patient Rights Association cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/agrisafe-network.jpeg
AgriSafe Network
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/american-patient-rights-association.jpeg
American Patient Rights Association
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

AgriSafe Network company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to American Patient Rights Association company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, American Patient Rights Association company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to AgriSafe Network company.

In the current year, American Patient Rights Association company and AgriSafe Network company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither American Patient Rights Association company nor AgriSafe Network company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither American Patient Rights Association company nor AgriSafe Network company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither American Patient Rights Association company nor AgriSafe Network company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither AgriSafe Network company nor American Patient Rights Association company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither AgriSafe Network nor American Patient Rights Association holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither AgriSafe Network company nor American Patient Rights Association company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

AgriSafe Network company employs more people globally than American Patient Rights Association company, reflecting its scale as a Public Health.

Neither AgriSafe Network nor American Patient Rights Association holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither AgriSafe Network nor American Patient Rights Association holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither AgriSafe Network nor American Patient Rights Association holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither AgriSafe Network nor American Patient Rights Association holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither AgriSafe Network nor American Patient Rights Association holds HIPAA certification.

Neither AgriSafe Network nor American Patient Rights Association holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H