Comparison Overview

Living/Dying Project

VS

MindWise

Living/Dying Project

P.O. Box 357, Fairfax, california, US, 94978
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

We offer support to those who wish to explore conscious living, compassionate caregiving, and conscious dying. The Living/Dying Project serves two main functions: First, if you are facing a life-threatening illness, caring for someone who is, or are committed to spiritual transformation, we provide conscious and compassionate support through counseling, workshops, and ongoing groups. Together we dive into a deep investigation of our relationship with death and how it informs the way we live. Second, the Living/Dying Project is committed to educating people from all backgrounds to be able to provide spiritual support for their loved ones or clients who are facing a life-threatening illnesses. We provide ongoing training and support for you and your practice. Although this work may seem daunting, we are living in a critical time where conscious compassion is fiercely needed. We believe all are capable of this heart-opening practice. “The Living/Dying Project is one of the most beautiful, profound and lovely organizations I know of. Dale and the people there have helped so many of my beloved friends cross over gracefully to whatever awaits us, beginning nearly thirty years ago, and helping my family once again just a few months ago.” - Anne Lamott, Award-winning New York Times Best-selling Author Stay up to date with all of the happenings at the Living/Dying Project by visiting our website and subscribing to our newsletter. We would love to hear from you, contact us to learn more!

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 7
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

MindWise

Pinewood House, Belfast, BT9 5NW, GB
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

MindWise is one of Northern Ireland’s leading mental health charities delivering 33 plus key services run by 100 professional staff and 80 volunteers. With the backing of more than 420 members, we raise awareness and each year help more than 10,000 people affected by mental health issues to tackle their problems. We support new mums, children and young people, adults through our housing and community services, and people within the criminal justice system.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 118
Subsidiaries: 7
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/livingdyingproject.jpeg
Living/Dying Project
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/mindwise-new-vision.jpeg
MindWise
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
Living/Dying Project
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
MindWise
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Living/Dying Project in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for MindWise in 2026.

Incident History — Living/Dying Project (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Living/Dying Project cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

MindWise cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/livingdyingproject.jpeg
Living/Dying Project
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mindwise-new-vision.jpeg
MindWise
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

MindWise company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Living/Dying Project company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, MindWise company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Living/Dying Project company.

In the current year, MindWise company and Living/Dying Project company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither MindWise company nor Living/Dying Project company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither MindWise company nor Living/Dying Project company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither MindWise company nor Living/Dying Project company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Living/Dying Project company nor MindWise company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Living/Dying Project nor MindWise holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

MindWise company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Living/Dying Project company.

MindWise company employs more people globally than Living/Dying Project company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Living/Dying Project nor MindWise holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Living/Dying Project nor MindWise holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Living/Dying Project nor MindWise holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Living/Dying Project nor MindWise holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Living/Dying Project nor MindWise holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Living/Dying Project nor MindWise 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