Comparison Overview

Cornell Policy Review

VS

Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council

Cornell Policy Review

Caldwell Hall, Ithaca, New York, 14853, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27

Cornell Policy Review is the official public policy journal of the Cornell Brooks School of Public Policy. A forum for insightful, objective, and provocative discussion on public policy, CPR is a community of scholar-practitioners from across the world, examining policy within local, national, and global environments. The editorial board solicits commentary, analysis, book reviews, interviews, and scholarly contributions from those interested in public policy from Cornell University and beyond. Cornell Policy Review editors and solicited authors explore the many layers of current policy, attempting to understand how various layers of decision-making shape the trajectory of society. With a new year of dynamic and contentious global policy issues, the Cornell Policy Review is consistently striving to present relevant analyses at all levels of impact. We sincerely hope you consider contributing to the discussion.

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 22
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council

303 E 17th Ave, Suite 910, Denver, Colorado, US, 80203
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

Since 1967, the Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council (CBHC) has served as the membership association for Colorado’s statewide system of community behavioral health providers. CBHC member organizations are the backbone of Colorado’s public behavioral health safety net, working to ensure all Coloradoans have access to quality, community-based services tailored to the unique needs and strengths of each community. In order to continue to provide care and enhance services, CBHC also acts as an advocacy organization at both the state and federal level to ensure the continuation and expansion of care across our state. CBHC’s Members Include: 16 Community Mental Health Centers; 1 Specialty Clinic – Servicios de La Raza

NAICS: 921
NAICS Definition: Executive, Legislative, and Other General Government Support
Employees: 13
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/the-cornell-policy-review.jpeg
Cornell Policy Review
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/colorado-behavioral-healthcare-council.jpeg
Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council
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
Cornell Policy Review
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Cornell Policy Review in 2025.

Incidents vs Public Policy Offices Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council in 2025.

Incident History — Cornell Policy Review (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Cornell Policy Review cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/the-cornell-policy-review.jpeg
Cornell Policy Review
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/colorado-behavioral-healthcare-council.jpeg
Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Cornell Policy Review company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Cornell Policy Review company.

In the current year, Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company and Cornell Policy Review company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company nor Cornell Policy Review company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company nor Cornell Policy Review company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company nor Cornell Policy Review company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Cornell Policy Review company nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Cornell Policy Review nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Cornell Policy Review company nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Cornell Policy Review company employs more people globally than Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council company, reflecting its scale as a Public Policy Offices.

Neither Cornell Policy Review nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Cornell Policy Review nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Cornell Policy Review nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Cornell Policy Review nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Cornell Policy Review nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Cornell Policy Review nor Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H