Comparison Overview

Community Healthcore

VS

ABAnzamos

Community Healthcore

Administration / Central Office, Longview, Texas, 75601, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22

We are a community center that has been proudly providing mental health and behavioral health services to North East Texas residents for 55 years. It is our honor and privilege to serve the communities that we call home. Our mission statement is: HELPING PEOPLE ACHIEVE DIGNITY, INDEPENDENCE & THEIR DREAMS. How do we strive to do this? -Serving as the mental health and intellectual disability governing authority for Bowie, Cass, Gregg, Harrison, Marion, Panola, Red River, Rusk and Upshur counties. -Helping people and their families heal the consequences of mental illness. -Assisting people with an intellectual disability and their families achieve maximum independence in all aspects of their lives. -Providing programs and services in greater East Texas that help people lead lives free from addictions.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 351
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

ABAnzamos

1225 Acda Juan Ponce de Leon, San Juan, 00907, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Nuestra misión es empoderar a los niños con retrasos en el desarrollo y a sus familias brindándoles una terapia ABA compasiva y basada en evidencia. Estamos comprometidos a ayudar a los niños a lograr la independencia, mejorar las habilidades sociales y de comunicación y reducir las conductas desafiantes. Nuestro equipo trabaja en estrecha colaboración con las familias para fomentar el éxito a largo plazo y estamos igualmente dedicados a apoyar el crecimiento profesional de nuestros terapeutas.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 7
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/community-healthcore-integrated-health-services.jpeg
Community Healthcore
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/abanzamos.jpeg
ABAnzamos
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
Community Healthcore
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
ABAnzamos
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Community Healthcore in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ABAnzamos in 2026.

Incident History — Community Healthcore (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Community Healthcore cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — ABAnzamos (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ABAnzamos cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/community-healthcore-integrated-health-services.jpeg
Community Healthcore
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/abanzamos.jpeg
ABAnzamos
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ABAnzamos company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Community Healthcore company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, ABAnzamos company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Community Healthcore company.

In the current year, ABAnzamos company and Community Healthcore company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither ABAnzamos company nor Community Healthcore company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither ABAnzamos company nor Community Healthcore company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither ABAnzamos company nor Community Healthcore company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Community Healthcore company nor ABAnzamos company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Community Healthcore nor ABAnzamos holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Community Healthcore company nor ABAnzamos company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Community Healthcore company employs more people globally than ABAnzamos company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Community Healthcore nor ABAnzamos holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Community Healthcore nor ABAnzamos holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Community Healthcore nor ABAnzamos holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Community Healthcore nor ABAnzamos holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Community Healthcore nor ABAnzamos holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Community Healthcore nor ABAnzamos 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