Comparison Overview

Psychological Assessment Solutions

VS

Acadiana Treatment Center

Psychological Assessment Solutions

-, Washington, DC, 20001, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22
Between 750 and 799

Psychological Assessment Solutions (PAS) is a Metro Washington, DC based organization. Owned and operated by clinicians, PAS specializes in comprehensive psychological assessments and therapeutic interventions for children, adolescents, and adults. The PAS mission is to promote excellence in interventions, assessments, and technological advancement in mental health care and educational achievement. This is accomplished by working with organizations, schools, parents, and direct clients to identify emotional and situational barriers. PAS also develops solutions to overcome these barriers as well as building upon strengths for achieving success.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 9
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Acadiana Treatment Center

156 Choctaw Rd, Sunset, Louisiana, 70584, US
Last Update: 2026-01-03

Louisiana’s Choice for Success in Recovery Located in Sunset, Louisiana, Acadiana Treatment Center is the state’s leading psychiatric residential treatment provider for adolescents. Offering residential rehabilitation services for adolescents ages 12-17 of all genders since 2004, Acadiana understands the importance of treating the whole person rather than just their symptoms. As such, we offer comprehensive care based on each adolescent’s needs, taking an evidence-based approach to healing from the following mental health conditions: Anxiety Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) Bipolar disorder Depression Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) Self-harm Depending on each patient’s goals for recovery, programming at Acadiana may include individual, group, family, and experiential therapies, along with medication management services and basic medical care. Our professional staff members are known for unmatched expertise and compassionate care in all they do to support the adolescents and families we care for. To learn more about the types of therapies we provide, or any other aspect of our programming, please reach out at 337-510-4541

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 22
Subsidiaries: 72
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/psychological-assessment-solutions-llc.jpeg
Psychological Assessment Solutions
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/acadiana-treatment-center.jpeg
Acadiana Treatment Center
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
Psychological Assessment Solutions
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Acadiana Treatment Center
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Psychological Assessment Solutions in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Acadiana Treatment Center in 2026.

Incident History — Psychological Assessment Solutions (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Psychological Assessment Solutions cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Acadiana Treatment Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Acadiana Treatment Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/psychological-assessment-solutions-llc.jpeg
Psychological Assessment Solutions
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/acadiana-treatment-center.jpeg
Acadiana Treatment Center
Incidents

Date Detected: 6/2023
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog

FAQ

Both Psychological Assessment Solutions company and Acadiana Treatment Center company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Acadiana Treatment Center company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Psychological Assessment Solutions company has not reported any.

In the current year, Acadiana Treatment Center company and Psychological Assessment Solutions company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Acadiana Treatment Center company nor Psychological Assessment Solutions company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Acadiana Treatment Center company has disclosed at least one data breach, while Psychological Assessment Solutions company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Acadiana Treatment Center company nor Psychological Assessment Solutions company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Psychological Assessment Solutions company nor Acadiana Treatment Center company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Psychological Assessment Solutions nor Acadiana Treatment Center holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Acadiana Treatment Center company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Psychological Assessment Solutions company.

Acadiana Treatment Center company employs more people globally than Psychological Assessment Solutions company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Psychological Assessment Solutions nor Acadiana Treatment Center holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Psychological Assessment Solutions nor Acadiana Treatment Center holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Psychological Assessment Solutions nor Acadiana Treatment Center holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Psychological Assessment Solutions nor Acadiana Treatment Center holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Psychological Assessment Solutions nor Acadiana Treatment Center holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Psychological Assessment Solutions nor Acadiana Treatment Center 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