Comparison Overview

Real Recovery Solutions

VS

Community Reach Center

Real Recovery Solutions

14702 N Florida Ave, Suite 200, Tampa, Florida, US, 33613
Last Update: 2026-01-22

Residential/PHP/IOP/OP SUD Treatment in Tampa, Bradenton, New Port Richey We have developed a comprehensive and personalized program to help individuals struggling with substance use disorders. Our Program offers high-quality care for comfort, convenience, and personal growth. A holistic approach to recovery will be at the heart of the program, addressing not just the physical but also the emotional and psychological aspects of addiction. It is designed to equip participants with the necessary skills and tools to handle addiction, prevent relapse, and flourish in daily life. The program will include group therapy, individual counseling, family education, and peer support with an evidence-based 12-step focus tailored to each individual's unique needs and objectives. We understand the complexities of addiction, and our dedicated team of professionals will work tirelessly to provide comprehensive and empathetic care.

NAICS: 62133
NAICS Definition: Offices of Mental Health Practitioners (except Physicians)
Employees: 21
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Community Reach Center

1870 W 122nd Ave, Westminster, Colorado, 80234, US
Last Update:

In 1957, Community Reach Center started in Commerce City, Colorado. It began with a small team of mental health experts from the University of Colorado Medical Center. Ten years later, a big change happened. The government passed the Community Mental Health Act to improve mental health care. This was part of President Kennedy’s plan for better mental health treatment. Our center was the first in our region to get support from this new law. We created a safe place for mental health care that people from other states came to see. Now, 65 years later, we help around 13,000 people every year. We provide care in different locations like clinics, schools, and homes to support our community.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 312
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/real-recovery-solutions.jpeg
Real Recovery 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/community-reach-center.jpeg
Community Reach 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
Real Recovery Solutions
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Community Reach 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 Real Recovery Solutions in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Community Reach Center in 2026.

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

Real Recovery Solutions cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Community Reach Center (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Community Reach Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/real-recovery-solutions.jpeg
Real Recovery Solutions
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/community-reach-center.jpeg
Community Reach Center
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Community Reach Center company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Real Recovery Solutions company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Community Reach Center company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Real Recovery Solutions company.

In the current year, Community Reach Center company and Real Recovery Solutions company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Community Reach Center company nor Real Recovery Solutions company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Community Reach Center company nor Real Recovery Solutions company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Community Reach Center company nor Real Recovery Solutions company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions company nor Community Reach Center company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions nor Community Reach Center holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions company nor Community Reach Center company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Community Reach Center company employs more people globally than Real Recovery Solutions company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions nor Community Reach Center holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions nor Community Reach Center holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions nor Community Reach Center holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions nor Community Reach Center holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions nor Community Reach Center holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Real Recovery Solutions nor Community Reach 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