Comparison Overview

Ontrak Health

VS

The Couples Workshop

Ontrak Health

Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Ontrak Health is a leading AI-driven healthcare company that finds and engages hard-to-reach populations with unaddressed behavioral health issues and chronic disease to improve outcomes and meaningfully reduce healthcare costs for health plans and employers. Our validated cost savings are driven by a 42% reduction in ED visits and 63% reduction in inpatient stays on average across our book of business. How does the Ontrak program work? Ontrak’s integrated platform leverages AI, predictive analytics and digital tools combined with behavioral health provider visits and evidence-based coaching. Our partners value the impactful outcomes we help them achieve, including industry-leading engagement, improved member health, better healthcare utilization, and durable cost savings. What makes the Ontrak Program different than other behavioral health solutions? Our ability to find, engage, and provide customized care pathways to treatment for complex populations with unaddressed behavioral health issues (anxiety, depression, and substance use disorder) and comorbid chronic diseases. Our person-centered approach helps individuals overcome barriers to care, develop self-efficacy, and receive the treatment and advocacy they need. The end result is superior outcomes aligned to the Quadruple Aim: validated cost savings; improved clinical outcomes; industry-leading member engagement and satisfaction; and effective provider collaboration. Ontrak’s mission is to improve the health and save the lives of as many people as possible. Please contact us at www.OntrakHealth.com if you would like to learn how a partnership with Ontrak can help support your organization’s population health and financial goals.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 144
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

The Couples Workshop

None, None, Fort Collins, CO - Colorado, US, 80525
Last Update:
Between 750 and 799

You already have skills in setting and achieving goals. I want to use those strengths, tied to my relationship tools, to help you guys feel connected again. I focus on the future of your relationship, not primarily on your past. While we explore any past issues, you should know my focus is on the future of your relationship. When you are determined for positive change, couples therapy doesn't have to be long-term. Couples therapy services are provided both in-person and online. Leave the BS at the door - let's get to work.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 1
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/ontrak-health.jpeg
Ontrak Health
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/toolsforus.jpeg
The Couples Workshop
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
Ontrak Health
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
The Couples Workshop
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ontrak Health in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The Couples Workshop in 2026.

Incident History — Ontrak Health (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ontrak Health cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — The Couples Workshop (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Couples Workshop cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ontrak-health.jpeg
Ontrak Health
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/toolsforus.jpeg
The Couples Workshop
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

The Couples Workshop company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ontrak Health company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, The Couples Workshop company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Ontrak Health company.

In the current year, The Couples Workshop company and Ontrak Health company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither The Couples Workshop company nor Ontrak Health company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither The Couples Workshop company nor Ontrak Health company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither The Couples Workshop company nor Ontrak Health company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Ontrak Health company nor The Couples Workshop company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Ontrak Health nor The Couples Workshop holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Ontrak Health company nor The Couples Workshop company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Ontrak Health company employs more people globally than The Couples Workshop company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Ontrak Health nor The Couples Workshop holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Ontrak Health nor The Couples Workshop holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Ontrak Health nor The Couples Workshop holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Ontrak Health nor The Couples Workshop holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Ontrak Health nor The Couples Workshop holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Ontrak Health nor The Couples Workshop 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