Comparison Overview

Camphill Village Copake

VS

Langton Green

Camphill Village Copake

84 Camphill Road, Copake, New York, US, 12516
Last Update: 2025-11-21

Camphill Village Copake is a productive and welcoming community where people of many abilities and cultures live, work, and unfold their gifts together. The founding of Camphill Village in 1961 was part of a transformative movement in the United States to reform how society treats people with special needs. We are an integrated community where people with developmental differences are living a life of dignity, equality, and purpose.

NAICS: 923
NAICS Definition: Administration of Human Resource Programs
Employees: 73
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Langton Green

3016 Arundel On The Bay Rd, Annapolis, Maryland, US, 21403-4302
Last Update: 2025-11-20
Between 750 and 799

Since its founding in 1984, Langton Green, an Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County -based residential community that supports adults with intellectual disabilities, has sought to achieve three main goals: Establish a place where people with varying needs and abilities can live, work, and learn to positively impact the surrounding community. Provide programs and services tailored to the individual that help each person develop the skills they need to live as independently as possible. Ensure that each person is able to realize his or her potential in ways that they could not in a different setting. Ensure that each person is able to realize his or her potential in ways that they could not in a different setting.

NAICS: 923
NAICS Definition: Administration of Human Resource Programs
Employees: 69
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/camphill-village-copake.jpeg
Camphill Village Copake
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/langton-green.jpeg
Langton Green
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
Camphill Village Copake
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Langton Green
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Health and Human Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Camphill Village Copake in 2025.

Incidents vs Health and Human Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Langton Green in 2025.

Incident History — Camphill Village Copake (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Camphill Village Copake cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Langton Green (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Langton Green cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/camphill-village-copake.jpeg
Camphill Village Copake
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/langton-green.jpeg
Langton Green
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Langton Green company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Camphill Village Copake company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Langton Green company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Camphill Village Copake company.

In the current year, Langton Green company and Camphill Village Copake company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Langton Green company nor Camphill Village Copake company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Langton Green company nor Camphill Village Copake company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Langton Green company nor Camphill Village Copake company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Camphill Village Copake company nor Langton Green company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Camphill Village Copake nor Langton Green holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Camphill Village Copake company nor Langton Green company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Camphill Village Copake company employs more people globally than Langton Green company, reflecting its scale as a Health and Human Services.

Neither Camphill Village Copake nor Langton Green holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Camphill Village Copake nor Langton Green holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Camphill Village Copake nor Langton Green holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Camphill Village Copake nor Langton Green holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Camphill Village Copake nor Langton Green holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Camphill Village Copake nor Langton Green 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