Comparison Overview

NAMI Greater Houston

VS

Bay Area Clinical Associates

NAMI Greater Houston

9401 Southwest Freeway, Houston, TX, 77074, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22

The mission of NAMI Greater Houston is to provide advocacy, education, support and public awareness so that all individuals and families affected by mental illness can build better lives. NAMI Greater Houston envisions a healing community where all persons affected by mental illness can experience resiliency on the road to wellness. NAMI Greater Houston provides FREE education programs, peer-facilitated support groups, and grassroots advocacy initiatives that enable families and consumers to better understand the complexities and challenges of living with a mental illness and in doing so, become more effective self-advocates. NAMI Greater Houston vigorously promotes the development of community mental health programs and services, improved access to services, increased opportunities for recovery, reduced stigma and discrimination, and increased public understanding of mental illness. Through our peer-run resource center – the S.E.A. (Support, Education and Advocacy) Center, families and consumers can access the help they need.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 22
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Bay Area Clinical Associates

1530 Meridian Ave, 200, San Jose, California, US, 95125
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Welcome to Bay Area Clinical Associates! Since 2007, our team of clinicians has been providing innovative mental health services to young individuals and families across the San Francisco Bay Area. We are dedicated to treating mental illness in our patients and guiding them toward cultivating positive habits and unlocking their maximum potential. What sets us apart is our unwavering dedication to administering evidence-based treatment to young individuals dealing with mental health challenges. Our collaborative approach involves a diverse treatment team comprising proficient psychiatrists, psychologists, licensed clinical social workers, licensed marriage & family therapists, as well as pre-licensed clinicians, all working cohesively within an integrated care framework. BACA's commitment extends to fostering an exceptional work environment for clinicians, aiming to be the top choice for Bay Area professionals in the field.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 51
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/nami-greater-houston.jpeg
NAMI Greater Houston
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/bay-area-clinical-associates-p-c.jpeg
Bay Area Clinical Associates
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
NAMI Greater Houston
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Bay Area Clinical Associates
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for NAMI Greater Houston in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bay Area Clinical Associates in 2026.

Incident History — NAMI Greater Houston (X = Date, Y = Severity)

NAMI Greater Houston cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Bay Area Clinical Associates (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bay Area Clinical Associates cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/nami-greater-houston.jpeg
NAMI Greater Houston
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bay-area-clinical-associates-p-c.jpeg
Bay Area Clinical Associates
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Bay Area Clinical Associates company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to NAMI Greater Houston company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Bay Area Clinical Associates company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to NAMI Greater Houston company.

In the current year, Bay Area Clinical Associates company and NAMI Greater Houston company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Bay Area Clinical Associates company nor NAMI Greater Houston company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Bay Area Clinical Associates company nor NAMI Greater Houston company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Bay Area Clinical Associates company nor NAMI Greater Houston company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston company nor Bay Area Clinical Associates company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston nor Bay Area Clinical Associates holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston company nor Bay Area Clinical Associates company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Bay Area Clinical Associates company employs more people globally than NAMI Greater Houston company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston nor Bay Area Clinical Associates holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston nor Bay Area Clinical Associates holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston nor Bay Area Clinical Associates holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston nor Bay Area Clinical Associates holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston nor Bay Area Clinical Associates holds HIPAA certification.

Neither NAMI Greater Houston nor Bay Area Clinical Associates 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