Comparison Overview

FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES

VS

PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY

FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES

5335 Peters Creek Rd, Roanoke, Virginia, 24019, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Since our inception in 1992, Family Preservation Services, Inc. has been a leader and innovator in the development and provision of community-based mental and behavioral health services in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Family Preservation Services, Inc. with the support and collective expertise of our global parent company, Pathways by Molina, continues a commitment to promoting positive change in the individuals, families and communities that we impact each day. Together we are CREATING HEALTHY COMMUNITIES.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 546
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY

PO BOX 1945, SEBASTOPOL, California, 95473, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22

Programs in Bowen Theory provides education and training in family systems theory and family therapy for mental health professionals and the community. Located in Sonoma County in Northern California, and part of a national network of education and training centers, Programs in Bowen Theory sponsors conferences and training seminars, and serves as a center for professionals using Bowen theory. Bowen family systems theory focuses on the family emotional system and how it affects individual behavior and development. Based in the natural sciences and systems thinking, Bowen theory is applied in individual, couple, and family therapy for emotional illness and other problems of the emotional system. Bowen theory also has much to offer the work place and other groups and their leaders in addressing problems arising from relationships.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 2
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/family-preservation-services.jpeg
FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES
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/programs-in-bowen-theory.jpeg
PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY
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
FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY in 2026.

Incident History — FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES (X = Date, Y = Severity)

FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/family-preservation-services.jpeg
FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/programs-in-bowen-theory.jpeg
PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company.

In the current year, PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company and FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company nor FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company nor FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company nor FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES company employs more people globally than PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY holds HIPAA certification.

Neither FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES nor PROGRAMS IN BOWEN THEORY 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