Comparison Overview

Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center

VS

Indiana Family Health Council

Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center

802 Ventura Avenue, Midland, Texas, 79705, US
Last Update: 2025-11-26

Midland Children’s Rehabilitation Center (MCRC) is a 501 (c)(3) organization providing occupational, physical, and speech therapy as well as tutoring for children with dyslexia. The center was started in 1956 and was originally called the Midland Cerebral Palsy Center. We are a pediatric only facility serving infants through 22 years of age. The mission of MCRC is to change the lives of children by providing neurological, orthopedic and developmental therapy, in a compassionate environment, regardless of a family’s ability to pay. Our vision is to provide these services at little or no cost to the families. To date the Center has never charged for services and relies on the generosity of the community to be able to do so. Funding for MCRC comes from fundraising events, foundations, corporations, businesses and individual donors.

NAICS: 923
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 25
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Indiana Family Health Council

2960 N Meridian St, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46208, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

The Indiana Family Health Council is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation which has been in existence for 40 years. IFHC has a Board of Directors which is the designated body legally responsible for the overall organization, management, and operation. The Mission of the agency is to promote and facilitate family planning and reproductive health services for those in need.

NAICS: 923
NAICS Definition: Administration of Human Resource Programs
Employees: 12
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/midland-children's-rehabilitation-center.jpeg
Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center
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/indiana-family-health-council.jpeg
Indiana Family Health Council
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
Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Indiana Family Health Council
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Health and Human Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center in 2025.

Incidents vs Health and Human Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Indiana Family Health Council in 2025.

Incident History — Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Indiana Family Health Council (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Indiana Family Health Council cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/midland-children's-rehabilitation-center.jpeg
Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/indiana-family-health-council.jpeg
Indiana Family Health Council
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company and Indiana Family Health Council company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Indiana Family Health Council company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company.

In the current year, Indiana Family Health Council company and Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Indiana Family Health Council company nor Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Indiana Family Health Council company nor Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Indiana Family Health Council company nor Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company nor Indiana Family Health Council company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center nor Indiana Family Health Council holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company nor Indiana Family Health Council company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center company employs more people globally than Indiana Family Health Council company, reflecting its scale as a Health and Human Services.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center nor Indiana Family Health Council holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center nor Indiana Family Health Council holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center nor Indiana Family Health Council holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center nor Indiana Family Health Council holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center nor Indiana Family Health Council holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Midland Children's Rehabilitation Center nor Indiana Family Health Council holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H