Comparison Overview

eaze

VS

Covington Behavioral Health

eaze

Unter den Linden 26, None, Berlin, None, DE, 10117
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

We're helping people sleep better by offering a long-term, cheaper and healthier (digital) alternative to sleep supplements like Melatonin and sleeping pills. Our approach is based on Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and in our app, users are in close contact with their own, personal sleep coach, who will help them establish routines and build long-term, healthy sleep habits.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 15
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Covington Behavioral Health

201 Greenbriar Blvd, Covington, Louisiana, 70433, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Comprehensive Care with Dignity and Respect Covington Behavioral Health Hospital is a 104-bed treatment center in Covington, Louisiana, where adults and adolescents can receive comprehensive care for a wide range of mental health disorders. Care at Covington is provided at two levels: inpatient treatment and intensive outpatient programming (IOP). Covington’s inpatient program is designed to be a short-term treatment experience for individuals who need acute psychiatric care. Typical length of stay in the inpatient program is seven to 10 days. Less intensive longer-term care, which is often optimal for those who need step-down support following their inpatient experience, is available via IOP. Typical length of stay in IOP rages from four to 12 weeks. Individuals whose mental health issues are accompanied by chemical dependency, and who have been incapable of ending their substance abuse prior to starting treatment, may also complete detox at Covington before transitioning into residential treatment. Treatment techniques and therapeutic modalities that are incorporated into treatment at Covington include cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), crisis intervention therapy, and solution-focused therapy. Each person who heals at Covington Behavioral Health will follow a personalized treatment plan that is based upon a thorough assessment of his or her needs. Depending upon those needs, an individual’s experience at Covington may involve working with psychiatrists, medical psychologists, nurses, nurse practitioners, social workers, counselors, activity therapists, and mental health technicians. Covington Behavioral Health Hospital is accredited by the Joint Commission and accepts most major insurance plans. For more information, visit www.covingtonbh.com or call (985) 893-2970.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 64
Subsidiaries: 71
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/eazeapp.jpeg
eaze
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/covington-behavioral-health-hospital.jpeg
Covington Behavioral Health
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
eaze
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Covington Behavioral Health
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for eaze in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Covington Behavioral Health in 2026.

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

eaze cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Covington Behavioral Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Covington Behavioral Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/eazeapp.jpeg
eaze
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/covington-behavioral-health-hospital.jpeg
Covington Behavioral Health
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2023
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Covington Behavioral Health company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to eaze company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Covington Behavioral Health company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas eaze company has not reported any.

In the current year, Covington Behavioral Health company and eaze company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Covington Behavioral Health company nor eaze company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Covington Behavioral Health company has disclosed at least one data breach, while eaze company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Covington Behavioral Health company nor eaze company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither eaze company nor Covington Behavioral Health company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither eaze nor Covington Behavioral Health holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Covington Behavioral Health company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to eaze company.

Covington Behavioral Health company employs more people globally than eaze company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither eaze nor Covington Behavioral Health holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither eaze nor Covington Behavioral Health holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither eaze nor Covington Behavioral Health holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither eaze nor Covington Behavioral Health holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither eaze nor Covington Behavioral Health holds HIPAA certification.

Neither eaze nor Covington Behavioral Health 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