Comparison Overview

Ocean Recovery

VS

Lotus Group Counseling

Ocean Recovery

None
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

OCEAN RECOVERY is a multifaceted, gender-specific, licensed treatment center located on the shores of beautiful Newport Beach, California. We specialize in treating men and women suffering from drug and alcohol addiction and/or eating disorders. The program offers a highly individualized program with emphasis on biological, psychological, educational, and social needs so as to allow for healing of the whole self in the recovery process. A highly structured environment in combination with a therapeutic approach promotes stability and encourages the client to maintain a level of consistent personal growth.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 42
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Lotus Group Counseling

11950 Fishers Crossing Dr, Fishers, Indiana, 46038, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

At Lotus Group, our counselors believe good counseling begins with a professional who truly understands life and what living a life well is all about. It begins by recognizing life as the greatest gift we have ever been given. It roots in the realization that life is not all about me, and has more to do with giving than receiving. It flourishes in an eternal focus beyond the moment and the here and now, and blooms with the unmistakable truth that our relationships are the most important part of life. Our mission begins with having counselors who have figured out what life is about and are living it out.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 8
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/ocean-recovery.jpeg
Ocean Recovery
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/lotus-group-counseling.jpeg
Lotus Group Counseling
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
Ocean Recovery
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Lotus Group Counseling
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ocean Recovery in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lotus Group Counseling in 2026.

Incident History — Ocean Recovery (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ocean Recovery cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Lotus Group Counseling (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lotus Group Counseling cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ocean-recovery.jpeg
Ocean Recovery
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lotus-group-counseling.jpeg
Lotus Group Counseling
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Lotus Group Counseling company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ocean Recovery company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Lotus Group Counseling company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Ocean Recovery company.

In the current year, Lotus Group Counseling company and Ocean Recovery company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Lotus Group Counseling company nor Ocean Recovery company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Lotus Group Counseling company nor Ocean Recovery company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Lotus Group Counseling company nor Ocean Recovery company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Ocean Recovery company nor Lotus Group Counseling company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Ocean Recovery nor Lotus Group Counseling holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Ocean Recovery company nor Lotus Group Counseling company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Ocean Recovery company employs more people globally than Lotus Group Counseling company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Ocean Recovery nor Lotus Group Counseling holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ocean Recovery nor Lotus Group Counseling holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ocean Recovery nor Lotus Group Counseling holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ocean Recovery nor Lotus Group Counseling holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ocean Recovery nor Lotus Group Counseling holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ocean Recovery nor Lotus Group Counseling 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