Comparison Overview

Challenge Behavioral Healthcare

VS

Fora Health Treatment & Recovery

Challenge Behavioral Healthcare

None
Last Update: 2026-01-22

Challenge Behavioral Healthcare is an experienced and caring provider of mental health, substance abuse, and DUI treatment programs. Our system of care, which is well known for its compassionate and structured treatment, emphasizes the importance of caring for a person's concerns and needs in full. With over 20,000 clients and patients who found recovery since its inception in 1991, our mission remains the same: To offer ethical, compassionate and comprehensive treatment in the most cost-effective manner. Further, it is our commitment to restore mental health and well-being, and remain consistent with exemplary service.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 3
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Fora Health Treatment & Recovery

1312 SW Washington, Portland, undefined, 97208, US
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 750 and 799

Fora Health Treatment & Recovery formerly De Paul Treatment Centers is a healthcare nonprofit providing treatment, care, and advocacy for all who are affected by substance use disorder. Fora Health builds on De Paul's nearly five decades of experience and excellence delivering individualized care plans to support people and families in recovery. The new name is a renewed promise to our region, to offer exceptional, comprehensive care while also introducing an unmatched facility, deepening long-standing partnerships, and engaging the public in education and advocacy. Fora Health provides drug and alcohol treatment to men, women, youth, and families. We offer a full continuum of care that includes medical detox, residential, day treatment and outpatient programs, peer recovery mentors, family therapy, and treatment of co-occurring mental health disorders. We use comprehensive, culturally appropriate, and evidence-based practices that help individuals and families stabilize, reconnect and heal. Fora Health views addiction as a complex, chronic and treatable disease. We believe that all individuals have within them the innate health and capacity to recover. Fora Health’s programs are nationally accredited through the Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF).

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 95
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/defaultcompany.jpeg
Challenge Behavioral Healthcare
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/de-paul-treatment-centers.jpeg
Fora Health Treatment & Recovery
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
Challenge Behavioral Healthcare
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Fora Health Treatment & Recovery
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Challenge Behavioral Healthcare in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Fora Health Treatment & Recovery in 2026.

Incident History — Challenge Behavioral Healthcare (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Challenge Behavioral Healthcare cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Fora Health Treatment & Recovery (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fora Health Treatment & Recovery cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Challenge Behavioral Healthcare
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/de-paul-treatment-centers.jpeg
Fora Health Treatment & Recovery
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company.

In the current year, Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company and Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company nor Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company nor Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company nor Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Fora Health Treatment & Recovery company employs more people globally than Challenge Behavioral Healthcare company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Challenge Behavioral Healthcare nor Fora Health Treatment & Recovery 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