Comparison Overview

Anew Day

VS

Gandara Center

Anew Day

154 Hughes Rd. #1 Grass Valley, California 95945, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Anew Day is a faith based FREE lay-counseling center serving Nevada County for all of life's issues. We counsel ages 13 and up and offer individual counseling as well as support groups for men, women and teens. We were established in 2006 with the hope of helping hurting people who could not afford to pay for counseling. Depression is the leading cause of suicide and our county ranks at the top in California. We want people to know that there is hope and that help is a phone call away.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 1
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Gandara Center

147 Norman St, West Springfield, 01089, US
Last Update: 2026-01-15
Between 700 and 749

The mission of the Gándara Center is to promote the well being of Hispanics, African Americans, and other culturally diverse populations through innovative culturally competent behavioral health, prevention, and education services. EMPOWERMENT, INNOVATION, COMMUNITY Founded in 1977, Gándara Center provides the highest quality services to our clients and our community. We respect the dignity, promote the human and civil rights, and value the ethnic and cultural diversity of all people. Our performance outcomes and client satisfaction ratings demonstrate the critical importance of empowering people and families to be meaningfully involved in decisions related to their own lives and futures. At Gándara we look ahead - beyond current practices - to offer clients the comprehensive services and resources that they require for well-being. We look outward - connecting with our regional partners to build a safer, more involved, and healthier community. Gándara Center serves more than 11,000 people each year at over 40 locations across Massachusetts.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 588
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/anew-day.jpeg
Anew Day
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/gandara-center.jpeg
Gandara 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
Anew Day
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Gandara Center
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Anew Day in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Gandara Center in 2026.

Incident History — Anew Day (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Anew Day cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Gandara Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Gandara Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/anew-day.jpeg
Anew Day
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/gandara-center.jpeg
Gandara Center
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2024
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Anew Day company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Gandara Center company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Gandara Center company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Anew Day company has not reported any.

In the current year, Gandara Center company and Anew Day company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Gandara Center company nor Anew Day company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Gandara Center company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Anew Day company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Gandara Center company nor Anew Day company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Anew Day company nor Gandara Center company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Anew Day nor Gandara Center holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Anew Day company nor Gandara Center company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Gandara Center company employs more people globally than Anew Day company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Anew Day nor Gandara Center holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Anew Day nor Gandara Center holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Anew Day nor Gandara Center holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Anew Day nor Gandara Center holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Anew Day nor Gandara Center holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Anew Day nor Gandara Center 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