Comparison Overview

Christensen Law Firm (Canada)

VS

Georgia Justice Project

Christensen Law Firm (Canada)

6616 Ellis Rd, Cambridge, Ontario, N3C 2V4, CA
Last Update: 2025-11-28

Christensen Law Firm is Canada's leader in unsecured debt collection. We offer sophisticated legal expertise in a dignified, respectful, all-bite-and-no-bark manner. We assist your customers to pay what they owe you, using court enforcement as required. As a law firm, we do not resort to the disreputable tactics that have given debt collection a bad name. As we can recover full interest and collection costs from a suit- worthy delinquent customer, we help your customer pay voluntarily or simply obtain and enforce judgment. No empty threats. No tricks. No fuss. We generate thank-you notes, not complaints.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 35
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Georgia Justice Project

438 Edgewood Ave, Atlanta, GA, 30312, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Georgia Justice Project (GJP) strengthens our community by demonstrating a better way to represent and support individuals in the criminal justice system and reduce barriers to reentry. GJP promotes innovative change through direct legal representation, policy advocacy, education and coalition building. GJP has served low income people in Georgia who have been affected by the criminal justice system for over 35 years. GJP’s range of direct services include holistic criminal defense paired with social service support, as well as representation for criminal records issues, all provided free of charge. GJP travels statewide to educate individuals and service providers on criminal records issues, and has helped to pass 20 Georgia laws through advocacy efforts. GJP works to remove barriers to employment, housing, and other opportunities faced by those with a criminal record.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 47
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/christensen-law-firm-canada-.jpeg
Christensen Law Firm (Canada)
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/georgia-justice-project.jpeg
Georgia Justice Project
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
Christensen Law Firm (Canada)
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Georgia Justice Project
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Christensen Law Firm (Canada) in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Georgia Justice Project in 2025.

Incident History — Christensen Law Firm (Canada) (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Christensen Law Firm (Canada) cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Georgia Justice Project (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Georgia Justice Project cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/christensen-law-firm-canada-.jpeg
Christensen Law Firm (Canada)
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/georgia-justice-project.jpeg
Georgia Justice Project
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Georgia Justice Project company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Georgia Justice Project company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company.

In the current year, Georgia Justice Project company and Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Georgia Justice Project company nor Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Georgia Justice Project company nor Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Georgia Justice Project company nor Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company nor Georgia Justice Project company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) nor Georgia Justice Project holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company nor Georgia Justice Project company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Georgia Justice Project company employs more people globally than Christensen Law Firm (Canada) company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) nor Georgia Justice Project holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) nor Georgia Justice Project holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) nor Georgia Justice Project holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) nor Georgia Justice Project holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) nor Georgia Justice Project holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Christensen Law Firm (Canada) nor Georgia Justice Project holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

A vulnerability was determined in motogadget mo.lock Ignition Lock up to 20251125. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality of the component NFC Handler. Executing manipulation can lead to use of hard-coded cryptographic key . The physical device can be targeted for the attack. A high complexity level is associated with this attack. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Risk Information
cvss2
Base: 1.2
Severity: HIGH
AV:L/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
cvss3
Base: 2.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
cvss4
Base: 1.0
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:4.0/AV:P/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/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

OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From version 5.0 to 5.7, the interview attachment retrieval endpoint in the Recruitment module serves files based solely on an authenticated session and user-supplied identifiers, without verifying whether the requester has permission to access the associated interview record. Because the server does not perform any recruitment-level authorization checks, an ESS-level user with no access to recruitment workflows can directly request interview attachment URLs and receive the corresponding files. This exposes confidential interview documents—including candidate CVs, evaluations, and supporting files—to unauthorized users. The issue arises from relying on predictable object identifiers and session presence rather than validating the user’s association with the relevant recruitment process. This issue has been patched in version 5.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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

OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From version 5.0 to 5.7, the application’s recruitment attachment retrieval endpoint does not enforce the required authorization checks before serving candidate files. Even users restricted to ESS-level access, who have no permission to view the Recruitment module, can directly access candidate attachment URLs. When an authenticated request is made to the attachment endpoint, the system validates the session but does not confirm that the requesting user has the necessary recruitment permissions. As a result, any authenticated user can download CVs and other uploaded documents for arbitrary candidates by issuing direct requests to the attachment endpoint, leading to unauthorized exposure of sensitive applicant data. This issue has been patched in version 5.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 5.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/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

OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From version 5.0 to 5.7, the application does not invalidate existing sessions when a user is disabled or when a password change occurs, allowing active session cookies to remain valid indefinitely. As a result, a disabled user, or an attacker using a compromised account, can continue to access protected pages and perform operations as long as a prior session remains active. Because the server performs no session revocation or session-store cleanup during these critical state changes, disabling an account or updating credentials has no effect on already-established sessions. This makes administrative disable actions ineffective and allows unauthorized users to retain full access even after an account is closed or a password is reset, exposing the system to prolonged unauthorized use and significantly increasing the impact of account takeover scenarios. This issue has been patched in version 5.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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

OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From version 5.0 to 5.7, the password reset workflow does not enforce that the username submitted in the final reset request matches the account for which the reset process was originally initiated. After obtaining a valid reset link for any account they can receive email for, an attacker can alter the username parameter in the final reset request to target a different user. Because the system accepts the supplied username without verification, the attacker can set a new password for any chosen account, including privileged accounts, resulting in full account takeover. This issue has been patched in version 5.8.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/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