Comparison Overview

MTM_Services

VS

Discovery Point Retreat

MTM_Services

PO Box 1027, Holly Springs, North Carolina, 27540, US
Last Update: 2026-01-21
Between 750 and 799

We consult with Community Behavioral Healthcare Organizations to help them deliver the highest quality care possible efficiently! David Lloyd, Scott Lloyd, and their MTM Services team — of SPQM fame — have led 700+ behavioral health organizations across the country in adapting to changing healthcare delivery and payment systems. Today, MTM Services — in partnership with the National Council for Behavioral Health — offers a full suite of consulting services to prepare community behavioral health organizations, large health systems, managed care entities, and state and county behavioral health systems, for the dynamic new healthcare marketplace. Organizations that have worked with MTM Services have seen: 60% reduction in consumer wait times 39% reduction in cost of access to treatment process 34% reduction in staff time needed per access to treatment event Increase in referrals from primary care practices Average of $200,000 in annual savings through access to care efficiency Up to 9 hours a week documentation time savings per direct care staff See how you can replicate similar results in your organization.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 17
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Discovery Point Retreat

530 Hight Rd, None, Waxahachie, Texas, US, 75167
Last Update: 2026-01-22

Discovery Point Retreat is a leading Joint Commission accredited rehab center in Texas providing evidence-based, outcome driven and affordable addiction treatment. With a full continuum including medical detoxification, inpatient and outpatient programs, we can offer the right level of care at the right time for adults struggling with substance use and co-occurring mental health conditions like depression, anxiety and trauma. Discovery Point Retreat is renowned for clinical excellence and remarkable results. We are committed to the ongoing success of our clients, offering a treatment guarantee, extensive aftercare planning services, and lifelong alumni support.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 58
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/mtm_services.jpeg
MTM_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/discovery-point-retreat.jpeg
Discovery Point Retreat
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
MTM_Services
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Discovery Point Retreat
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for MTM_Services in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Discovery Point Retreat in 2026.

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

MTM_Services cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Discovery Point Retreat (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Discovery Point Retreat cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mtm_services.jpeg
MTM_Services
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/discovery-point-retreat.jpeg
Discovery Point Retreat
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Discovery Point Retreat company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to MTM_Services company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Discovery Point Retreat company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to MTM_Services company.

In the current year, Discovery Point Retreat company and MTM_Services company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Discovery Point Retreat company nor MTM_Services company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Discovery Point Retreat company nor MTM_Services company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Discovery Point Retreat company nor MTM_Services company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither MTM_Services company nor Discovery Point Retreat company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither MTM_Services nor Discovery Point Retreat holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither MTM_Services company nor Discovery Point Retreat company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Discovery Point Retreat company employs more people globally than MTM_Services company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither MTM_Services nor Discovery Point Retreat holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither MTM_Services nor Discovery Point Retreat holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither MTM_Services nor Discovery Point Retreat holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither MTM_Services nor Discovery Point Retreat holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither MTM_Services nor Discovery Point Retreat holds HIPAA certification.

Neither MTM_Services nor Discovery Point Retreat 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