Comparison Overview

Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers

VS

Aptum

Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers

Level 21, 227 Elizabeth Street, Sydney, NSW, 2000, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

CMN is committed to high standards of service and continued excellence in the practice of law. Established in 1983, now with a national presence, we have the ability to deliver solutions across Australia with offices in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide. We are leading advisors to government, industry and business. Our practice of law is driven by integrity, candour and a commitment to solutions to help our clients achieve their goals. We provide comprehensive legal services across all our practice areas with a market leading approach. As an employer, we are renowned for our unparalleled commitment to the development of our lawyers through real experience and opportunities. Our practice of law is progressive, innovative and built upon unparalleled experience in the fields in which we practice. Our experience extends to advising and advocating for our clients on their most significant complex transactions, legal matters and disputes.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 34
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Aptum

525 Collins St, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-28

Aptum is not a ‘do it all’ law firm. All we do is litigate complex commercial and tax disputes. Specialisation gives us excellence in our craft, and gives our clients dedicated expertise and experience to effectively resolve their disputes. Aptum’s approach alleviates the entrenched behaviours in litigation that cause frustration, delay and uncertainty, for which we’ve been awarded ‘Best Dispute Resolution & Litigation Firm (<$30m)’ at the Client Choice Awards. Aptum has offices in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane, and an established client base across Australia and internationally.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 17
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/craddock-murray-neumann-lawyers-pty-ltd.jpeg
Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers
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/aptumlegal.jpeg
Aptum
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
Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Aptum
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Aptum in 2025.

Incident History — Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Aptum (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Aptum cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/craddock-murray-neumann-lawyers-pty-ltd.jpeg
Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/aptumlegal.jpeg
Aptum
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Aptum company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Aptum company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company.

In the current year, Aptum company and Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Aptum company nor Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Aptum company nor Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Aptum company nor Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company nor Aptum company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers nor Aptum holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company nor Aptum company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers company employs more people globally than Aptum company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers nor Aptum holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers nor Aptum holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers nor Aptum holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers nor Aptum holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers nor Aptum holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Craddock Murray Neumann Lawyers nor Aptum 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