Comparison Overview

Fuller Hospital

VS

Cross Creek Hospital

Fuller Hospital

200 May St, None, Attleboro, Massachusetts, US, 02703
Last Update: 2026-01-22

Fuller Hospital is a 102-bed licensed, private psychiatric facility located in South Attleboro, Massachusetts providing inpatient and outpatient behavioral health services to residents of Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Inpatient units are designed to treat adults with general psychiatric or intellectual disabilities, as well as adolescents with general psychiatric issues. Patients with co-occurring psychiatric and substance abuse disorders can be treated on most units. Fuller Hospital also provides a less intensive Partial Hospitalization Program (PHP) to patients with psychiatric and co-occurring psychiatric and substance abuse disorders. Programs Include: Inpatient Treatment for Adolescents and Adults Partial Hospitalization for Adults Intellectual Disabilities Inpatient Treatment for Adults Partial Plus: short-term housing for men and women concurrent with PHP Community Services Program for Children and Adolescents Fuller Hospital is accredited by The Joint Commission and licensed by the Department of Mental Health (DMH) and Department of Public Health (DPH) Bureau of Substance Abuse Services. Our dedicated staff of psychiatrists, nurses, case managers and mental health technicians is committed to providing high quality patient care within a safe, clinically appropriate, welcoming environment. Contact 1-833-3FULLER or please contact our Intake Department at 508-761-8500 for admissions options.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 126
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Cross Creek Hospital

8402 Cross Park Drive, Austin, Texas, 78754, US
Last Update: 2025-11-17

Let Change Begin Here Located near Walnut Creek in Northeast Austin, Texas, Cross Creek Hospital provides exceptional clinical care for those grappling with substance abuse problems and co-occurring disorders. At our treatment center, we at Cross Creek offer inpatient care, partial hospitalization, intensive outpatient programming, detoxification services, and programming designed specifically for adolescents. The skilled and compassionate team at Cross Creek Hospital ensures that each patient is provided with the care deemed necessary for his or her specific treatment needs so that he or she can achieve success in recovery. Working with a team of licensed professionals including therapists, psychiatrists, and nurse practitioners, patients can obtain comprehensive care for the following conditions: • Depression • Bipolar disorder • Conduct disorder • Oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) • Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) • Schizophrenia • Dementia • Anxiety disorder • Alzheimer’s disease • Suicidal thoughts • Self-harm • Impulse control • Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) • Substance abuse (alcohol, synthetic marijuana, cocaine, prescription drugs, meth, heroin) Every senior, adult, and adolescent patient we care for here at Cross Creek Hospital will benefit from the evidence-based care provided by our team of professionals, as well research-supported techniques and methods that will encourage the patient’s continual progress in recovery, regardless of his or her diagnosis. Cross Creek, which remains one of the leaders in mental health and drug addiction treatment, has developed an environment where all patients can fully focus on their recovery and begin thriving in a manner where they are capable of developing a happy, healthy lifestyle. To learn more about our hospital, please contact us at (512) 549-8021.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 106
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/fuller-hospital.jpeg
Fuller Hospital
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/cross-creek-hospital.jpeg
Cross Creek Hospital
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
Fuller Hospital
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Cross Creek Hospital
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Fuller Hospital in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Cross Creek Hospital in 2026.

Incident History — Fuller Hospital (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Fuller Hospital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Cross Creek Hospital (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cross Creek Hospital cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fuller-hospital.jpeg
Fuller Hospital
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cross-creek-hospital.jpeg
Cross Creek Hospital
Incidents

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

FAQ

Fuller Hospital company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Cross Creek Hospital company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Cross Creek Hospital company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Fuller Hospital company has not reported any.

In the current year, Cross Creek Hospital company and Fuller Hospital company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Cross Creek Hospital company nor Fuller Hospital company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Cross Creek Hospital company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Fuller Hospital company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Cross Creek Hospital company nor Fuller Hospital company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Fuller Hospital company nor Cross Creek Hospital company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Fuller Hospital nor Cross Creek Hospital holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Cross Creek Hospital company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Fuller Hospital company.

Fuller Hospital company employs more people globally than Cross Creek Hospital company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Fuller Hospital nor Cross Creek Hospital holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Fuller Hospital nor Cross Creek Hospital holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Fuller Hospital nor Cross Creek Hospital holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Fuller Hospital nor Cross Creek Hospital holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Fuller Hospital nor Cross Creek Hospital holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Fuller Hospital nor Cross Creek Hospital 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