Comparison Overview

Edinburgh Gestalt Institute

VS

Center for Discovery

Edinburgh Gestalt Institute

51 Lothian Road, Edinburgh, Scotland, EH1 2DJ, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Welcome to Edinburgh Gestalt Institute (EGI). EGI is a registered educational charity based in central Edinburgh, Scotland. We specialise in high-quality, creative personal and professional development in relational, embodied Gestalt psychotherapy. EGI offers: introductory courses Diploma-level training in Gestalt psychotherapy supervision advanced training and workshops group therapy and personal development groups organisational consultancy access to a network of practitioners room hire The EGI staff team share a deep, lived commitment to relational embodied psychotherapy. We are interested in the ways in which our social, political, economic, cultural and ecological contexts influence human growth and change. We have a strong commitment to learning as a lifelong process, and to providing a safe and stimulating professional environment.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 2
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Center for Discovery

18401 Von Karman Ave, Suite 500, Irvine, California, US, 92612
Last Update: 2026-01-22

Center for Discovery has been providing residential and outpatient treatment for adults and teens for over 20 years. At Center for Discovery, we provide treatment for men and women with eating disorders, teens with eating disorders, teens with mental health disorders, and teens with substance abuse issues. Each of our locations is dedicated solely to one of our specialized treatment programs. By keeping each location specialized to one of our treatment programs, we are able to provide the most effective and efficient treatment. All of our locations provide treatment for only a small number of residents at one time to maintain an intimate setting and a high staff to resident ratio. Treatment within a residential neighborhood or outpatient facilities allows our clients to feel more comfortable in a familiar surrounding and provides greater transferability and internalization of the treatment experience to life after treatment. We place a high priority on providing an environment where our clients feel like and are treated like people, never patients.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 839
Subsidiaries: 9
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/edinburgh-gestalt-institute.jpeg
Edinburgh Gestalt Institute
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/center-for-discovery.jpeg
Center for Discovery
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
Edinburgh Gestalt Institute
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Center for Discovery
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Edinburgh Gestalt Institute in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Center for Discovery in 2026.

Incident History — Edinburgh Gestalt Institute (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Edinburgh Gestalt Institute cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Center for Discovery cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/edinburgh-gestalt-institute.jpeg
Edinburgh Gestalt Institute
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/center-for-discovery.jpeg
Center for Discovery
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Center for Discovery company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Center for Discovery company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company.

In the current year, Center for Discovery company and Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Center for Discovery company nor Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Center for Discovery company nor Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Center for Discovery company nor Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company nor Center for Discovery company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Edinburgh Gestalt Institute nor Center for Discovery holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Center for Discovery company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company.

Center for Discovery company employs more people globally than Edinburgh Gestalt Institute company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Edinburgh Gestalt Institute nor Center for Discovery holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Edinburgh Gestalt Institute nor Center for Discovery holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Edinburgh Gestalt Institute nor Center for Discovery holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Edinburgh Gestalt Institute nor Center for Discovery holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Edinburgh Gestalt Institute nor Center for Discovery holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Edinburgh Gestalt Institute nor Center for Discovery 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