Comparison Overview

HRCSB

VS

Bridge to Care

HRCSB

1241 North Main St, Harrisonburg, VA, 22802, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

The Harrisonburg-Rockingham Community Services Board strives to provide excellent services and to partner with each individual to achieve his or her best recovery. We support infants and toddlers, school-aged youth, and adults across their lifespan. Programs are licensed by the Virginia Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services. We are one of 40 community-based public providers of mental health, substance abuse, and developmental disability services throughout Virginia. The Commonwealth has designated the 40 CSBs as the single point of entry into publicly funded behavioral health and developmental services. HRCSB is supported through local, state and federal funds. We provide an array of programs and supports directly and through partnerships with other providers.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 77
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Bridge to Care

4902 50 Ave, Stony Plain, Alberta, T7Z 1C4, CA
Last Update: 2026-01-20

Bridge to Care Inc. is a not-for-profit organization with our corporate office based in Spruce Grove, AB with branches in Edmonton and Red Deer and been providing health care and support for a variety of needs in rural areas of Alberta. We are different because we offer a broader variety of services than other agencies. A simple list of provided services is to imply that these are finite, and mutually exclusive, whereas this is seldom the case in health care. We consider our services a very broad form of respite and community aid (in itself, a form of respite for society). Specialized attention includes care for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder, neurological disorders and other needs, persons of all ages with developmental disorders, nursing care for a variety of needs such as seniors care and dementia care, assistance and support through the various stages of pregnancy and childbirth, for accident victims, and other extensions in support of the community to address domestic violence and homelessness issues. We have clients that are supported from as little as one hour a week up to 24/7 dedication. Over the past year, Bridge to Care has established and confirmed the community need for the services provided. Frequently, these services are required by persons or families in some level of crisis where mainstream avenues of support can often not be available at the time of need. As Bridge to Care has become more established, other support agencies within the area, and people in general, have become increasingly aware of the value provided by these unique offerings and are referring accordingly.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 28
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/hrcsb.jpeg
HRCSB
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/bridgetocare.jpeg
Bridge to Care
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
HRCSB
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Bridge to Care
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for HRCSB in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bridge to Care in 2026.

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

HRCSB cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Bridge to Care (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bridge to Care cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hrcsb.jpeg
HRCSB
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bridgetocare.jpeg
Bridge to Care
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

HRCSB company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Bridge to Care company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Bridge to Care company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to HRCSB company.

In the current year, Bridge to Care company and HRCSB company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Bridge to Care company nor HRCSB company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Bridge to Care company nor HRCSB company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Bridge to Care company nor HRCSB company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither HRCSB company nor Bridge to Care company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither HRCSB nor Bridge to Care holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither HRCSB company nor Bridge to Care company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

HRCSB company employs more people globally than Bridge to Care company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither HRCSB nor Bridge to Care holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither HRCSB nor Bridge to Care holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither HRCSB nor Bridge to Care holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither HRCSB nor Bridge to Care holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither HRCSB nor Bridge to Care holds HIPAA certification.

Neither HRCSB nor Bridge to Care 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