Comparison Overview

Riverwood Center

VS

Asheville Recovery Center

Riverwood Center

1485 M 139, Benton Harbor, Michigan, 49022, US
Last Update: 2026-01-22

At Riverwood Center, we strive to make sure every person has an exceptional experience - every time. With a focus on compassionate effective care, and a trauma-informed culture of diversity and inclusion, we provide personalized effective behavioral health services to build a stronger and healthier community. Riverwood Center staff conduct business as a division of the Berrien Mental Health Authority, including our NorthStar Center, across 7 total sites in Southwest Michigan. We are a member of the Cornerstone Chamber of Commerce, and are accredited by the Commission on the Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities. We are also active with the National Council for Behavioral Health. Visit us at: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/riverwoodcenter Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/riverwoodcenter Twitter: https://twitter.com/RiverwoodCenter Web Home: www.riverwoodcenter.org Yellow Pages: https://goo.gl/7HmJzd North Star: www.northstarcenter.org Yelp: https://goo.gl/Dtmnwj If you are visiting this page in an emergency, please call 911 immediately. This page is not actively monitored, and does not accept requests to book, submit customer service information, or collect protected health information.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 95
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Asheville Recovery Center

9 Old Burnsville Hill Rd, Asheville, North Carolina, 28804, US
Last Update: 2026-01-19

The Asheville Recovery Center was founded by members of the recovery community with years of experience working in the addiction treatment field. Through their experience working in behavioral health and substance abuse treatment, they discovered that something was missing from the standard model of addiction treatment commonly found in most facilities. What addiction treatment is missing in the modern world is the intimate, compassionate nature that makes recovery possible. Rather than taking the time to focus on individual patients’ backgrounds, needs, and goals, facilities were letting clients slip through the cracks. The Asheville Recovery Center was founded to address the need for effective treatment in an intimate, supportive environment, and to bridge the gap between evidence-based therapeutic practice and spiritual and emotional care. The result is a program that aims to care for the whole individual: mentally, physically, emotionally, and spiritually in a real-world environment that also provides accountability, safety, a good dose of tough love, and a tight-knit, family setting. The essential elements of an effective treatment center are highly qualified, trained clinicians with experience in addressing the disease of addiction, and an approach of compassion and care for each individual who walks through the doors of the facility. Traditional therapy must be combined with individual care and love in order to truly reach the client. At Asheville Recovery Center, our aim is to provide treatment that’s backed up by evidence and results without ever sacrificing the intimacy necessary to truly connect with our clients.

NAICS: 621
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 27
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/riverwood-center.jpeg
Riverwood 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ashevillerecoverycenter.jpeg
Asheville Recovery 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
Riverwood Center
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Asheville Recovery 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 Riverwood Center in 2026.

Incidents vs Mental Health Care Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Asheville Recovery Center in 2026.

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

Riverwood Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Asheville Recovery Center cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/riverwood-center.jpeg
Riverwood Center
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/ashevillerecoverycenter.jpeg
Asheville Recovery Center
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Riverwood Center company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Asheville Recovery Center company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Asheville Recovery Center company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Riverwood Center company.

In the current year, Asheville Recovery Center company and Riverwood Center company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Asheville Recovery Center company nor Riverwood Center company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Asheville Recovery Center company nor Riverwood Center company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Asheville Recovery Center company nor Riverwood Center company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Riverwood Center company nor Asheville Recovery Center company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Riverwood Center nor Asheville Recovery Center holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Riverwood Center company nor Asheville Recovery Center company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Riverwood Center company employs more people globally than Asheville Recovery Center company, reflecting its scale as a Mental Health Care.

Neither Riverwood Center nor Asheville Recovery Center holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Riverwood Center nor Asheville Recovery Center holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Riverwood Center nor Asheville Recovery Center holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Riverwood Center nor Asheville Recovery Center holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Riverwood Center nor Asheville Recovery Center holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Riverwood Center nor Asheville Recovery 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