Comparison Overview

Charleston Law Review

VS

Library Journal

Charleston Law Review

81 Mary St, None, Charleston, South Carolina, US, 29403
Last Update: 2025-11-26

The Charleston Law Review is an independent organization composed entirely of upper-level students at the Charleston School of Law. In order to gain membership on the Charleston Law Review, first year students must compete in a writing competition that begins after spring semester finals have concluded. The Charleston Law Review then makes membership offers to students based on a combination of grades and the scored writing piece. The Charleston Law Review recruits the best and brightest students from the Charleston School of Law. The Law Review’s primary objective is to foster the knowledge and insight of students, practitioners, scholars, and the judiciary through a traditional forum dedicated to augmenting the pursuit of innovative legal expression, composition, and scholarship. Members of the Law Review contribute to this objective by editing articles, writing notes, and actively participating all aspects of the publication process.

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition: Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Employees: 3
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Library Journal

123 William St., New York, New York, 10038, US
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 750 and 799

Library Journal is the most trusted and respected publication for the library community. Built on more than a century of quality journalism and reviews, LJ provides groundbreaking features and analytical news reports covering technology, management, policy and other professional concerns to public, academic and institutional libraries. Our hefty reviews sections evaluate 8000+ reviews annually of books, ebooks, audiobooks, videos/DVDs, databases, systems and websites. Our team of library and literary experts communicate with our audience through print, digital and live content and continuously strive to stay on the cutting edge of the ever-evolving world of libraries.

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition: Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Employees: 219
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/charleston-law-review.jpeg
Charleston Law 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/libraryjournal.jpeg
Library Journal
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
Charleston Law Review
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Library Journal
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Book and Periodical Publishing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Charleston Law Review in 2025.

Incidents vs Book and Periodical Publishing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Library Journal in 2025.

Incident History — Charleston Law Review (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Charleston Law Review cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Library Journal (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Library Journal cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/charleston-law-review.jpeg
Charleston Law Review
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/libraryjournal.jpeg
Library Journal
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Library Journal company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Charleston Law Review company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Library Journal company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Charleston Law Review company.

In the current year, Library Journal company and Charleston Law Review company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Library Journal company nor Charleston Law Review company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Library Journal company nor Charleston Law Review company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Library Journal company nor Charleston Law Review company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Charleston Law Review company nor Library Journal company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Charleston Law Review nor Library Journal holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Library Journal company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Charleston Law Review company.

Library Journal company employs more people globally than Charleston Law Review company, reflecting its scale as a Book and Periodical Publishing.

Neither Charleston Law Review nor Library Journal holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Charleston Law Review nor Library Journal holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Charleston Law Review nor Library Journal holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Charleston Law Review nor Library Journal holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Charleston Law Review nor Library Journal holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Charleston Law Review nor Library Journal holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ThingsBoard in versions prior to v4.2.1 allows an authenticated user to upload malicious SVG images via the "Image Gallery", leading to a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The exploit can be triggered when any user accesses the public API endpoint of the malicious SVG images, or if the malicious images are embedded in an `iframe` element, during a widget creation, deployed to any page of the platform (e.g., dashboards), and accessed during normal operations. The vulnerability resides in the `ImageController`, which fails to restrict the execution of JavaScript code when an image is loaded by the user's browser. This vulnerability can lead to the execution of malicious code in the context of other users' sessions, potentially compromising their accounts and allowing unauthorized actions.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to to verify that the token used during the code exchange originates from the same authentication flow, which allows an authenticated user to perform account takeover via a specially crafted email address used when switching authentication methods and sending a request to the /users/login/sso/code-exchange endpoint. The vulnerability requires ExperimentalEnableAuthenticationTransfer to be enabled (default: enabled) and RequireEmailVerification to be disabled (default: disabled).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to sanitize team email addresses to be visible only to Team Admins, which allows any authenticated user to view team email addresses via the GET /api/v4/channels/{channel_id}/common_teams endpoint

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Exposure of email service credentials to users without administrative rights in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Devolutions Server: before 2025.2.21, before 2025.3.9.

Description

Exposure of credentials in unintended requests in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Server: through 2025.2.20, through 2025.3.8.