Comparison Overview

Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz

VS

Goodman Frost, PLLC

Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz

None
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

FORSTER BOUGHMAN & LEFKOWITZ HEAD OFFICE ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32751 2200 LUCIEN WAY, SUITE 405 PH: (855) WP-GROUP AREAS OF PRACTICE Asset Protection Wealth Preservation and Defense learn more Tax Planning and Controversy learn more Corporate Domestic and International learn more International Inbound and Outbound learn more Estate Planning & probate Preserving your Legacy learn more Read More...

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 3
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Goodman Frost, PLLC

20300 W. 12 Mile Rd Suite 101, Southfield, MI, 48076, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

In today’s overdrawn economy debtors are becoming more knowledgeable and skilled at evading current collection techniques. Although pre-suit collections can be successful via collection agencies, etc., the challenges creditors face today has made it increasingly necessary for “legal collections” to be made a part of a creditor’s overall collection strategy in order to compel a debtor to pay what is rightfully owed. Goodman Frost, PLLC has developed a comprehensive, systematic approach to collections that has an established rate of successful recoveries. We believe by giving every account the individual attention it requires by utilizing an established collection process followed by ultimately holding the debtor legally accountable, Goodman frost, PLLC provides unsurpassed results. Our talented team of lawyers, managers, collectors, paralegals and customer service representatives work tirelessly to make sure every case is given the utmost consideration so that we can provide resolution for our valued clients.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
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/defaultcompany.jpeg
Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz
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/goodmanfrostpllc.jpeg
Goodman Frost, PLLC
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
Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Goodman Frost, PLLC
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Goodman Frost, PLLC in 2025.

Incident History — Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Goodman Frost, PLLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Goodman Frost, PLLC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/goodmanfrostpllc.jpeg
Goodman Frost, PLLC
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Goodman Frost, PLLC company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Goodman Frost, PLLC company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company.

In the current year, Goodman Frost, PLLC company and Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Goodman Frost, PLLC company nor Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Goodman Frost, PLLC company nor Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Goodman Frost, PLLC company nor Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company nor Goodman Frost, PLLC company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz nor Goodman Frost, PLLC holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company nor Goodman Frost, PLLC company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Goodman Frost, PLLC company employs more people globally than Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz nor Goodman Frost, PLLC holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz nor Goodman Frost, PLLC holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz nor Goodman Frost, PLLC holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz nor Goodman Frost, PLLC holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz nor Goodman Frost, PLLC holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Forster Boughman & Lefkowitz nor Goodman Frost, PLLC 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