Comparison Overview

On Our Own Of Charlottesville

VS

The Gastonia's Potters House

On Our Own Of Charlottesville

123 4th St NW, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-4502, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22

On Our Own is a peer recovery center that provides adult members of the community with the support, understanding, and resources they need to pursue their own unique paths to recovery. Our services are always free, and our hearts are always open. If you find yourself in need of support, a place to be heard and felt , a place to be understood, or just a place to sit with other folks in safety and comfort during a difficult time, we invite you to drop by. Our house is a place where members are understood, trusted, and valued. It is a place to go for support, and to provide support to others. Whatever the reason, On Our Own welcomes anyone who needs support. If you are seeking to work things out surrounded by those who are pursuing their own recovery paths, we’re here for you. If you are limited by finances, access, or find yourself “outside the system” in any way, we are here for you. Whoever you are, and whatever your specific issues are, we will do our utmost to give you what aid we can. All members the On Our Own staff have a lived experience of what it is to struggle with mental health challenges or an addiction. We don’t approach these issues from the outside, but from the inside. We ourselves are pursuing our own particular recoveries. We know what it is like to confront what can sometimes seem like insurmountable challenges, and live through the pain, hopelessness, despair, vexation, confusion, and anger that is often associated with mental health challenges and addiction. The goal at On Our Own is not to “fix” anyone. We have thirty years of experience helping people who struggle with mental health challenges and addiction, and have been in similar places ourselves. But we do not believe that anyone is wise enough to dictate the course of anyone else’s recovery. Our goal, rather, is to empower people to understand where they are, where they have been, and to chart their own way forward.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 14
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

The Gastonia's Potters House

54 Burmill Rd, Gastonia, North Carolina, 28054, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

The Gastonia Potters is a faith-based program for women struggling with substance abuse/alcoholism and other life-threatening issues. The program is residential and consists of two phases, clients must stay a total of 18 months to complete the program in its entirety. During the first phase of the program, clients are taught the Bible and its application, they are guided and encouraged to get to the root of their addiction and begin to work towards the process of healing. Clients in the first phase are required to participate in all of the following: individual counseling, group therapy, substance abuse education, church services, job preparation courses, parenting classes, and volunteering. We believe that family involvement and restoration is critical, and we offer to counsel the families of clients as well. We also work closely with the local courts, prisons, probation offices, and DSS. In the second phase of the program, clients are transitioned into a separate home on the property and are able to begin their journey to re-enter the workplace or seek higher education. Developing positive characteristics such as strong work ethics, budgeting time and money, and responsibility are all of great importance at this stage of recovery. Clients in this stage are challenged to take their faith and apply it in everyday situations as they begin to prepare for program completion.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 4
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/on-our-own-of-charlottesville.jpeg
On Our Own Of Charlottesville
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/the-gastonia-s-potters-house.jpeg
The Gastonia's Potters House
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
On Our Own Of Charlottesville
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
The Gastonia's Potters House
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for On Our Own Of Charlottesville in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The Gastonia's Potters House in 2026.

Incident History — On Our Own Of Charlottesville (X = Date, Y = Severity)

On Our Own Of Charlottesville cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — The Gastonia's Potters House (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Gastonia's Potters House cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/on-our-own-of-charlottesville.jpeg
On Our Own Of Charlottesville
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/the-gastonia-s-potters-house.jpeg
The Gastonia's Potters House
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

The Gastonia's Potters House company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to On Our Own Of Charlottesville company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, The Gastonia's Potters House company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to On Our Own Of Charlottesville company.

In the current year, The Gastonia's Potters House company and On Our Own Of Charlottesville company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither The Gastonia's Potters House company nor On Our Own Of Charlottesville company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither The Gastonia's Potters House company nor On Our Own Of Charlottesville company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither The Gastonia's Potters House company nor On Our Own Of Charlottesville company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville company nor The Gastonia's Potters House company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville nor The Gastonia's Potters House holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville company nor The Gastonia's Potters House company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

On Our Own Of Charlottesville company employs more people globally than The Gastonia's Potters House company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville nor The Gastonia's Potters House holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville nor The Gastonia's Potters House holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville nor The Gastonia's Potters House holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville nor The Gastonia's Potters House holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville nor The Gastonia's Potters House holds HIPAA certification.

Neither On Our Own Of Charlottesville nor The Gastonia's Potters House 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