Comparison Overview

Good Call NYC

VS

Global Intellectual Property Agency

Good Call NYC

7 Marcus Garvey Blvd, Brooklyn, NY, 11206, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 700 and 749

Good Call is a community-centered tech nonprofit based in NYC working to disrupt the cycle of mass incarceration. The organization helps protect the rights of marginalized communities facing excessive and unnecessary arrests and unfair treatment by the criminal justice system. Through a free 24/7 hotline, youth programs, and community outreach, Good Call provides free proactive and/or immediate legal support for those arrested while educating and impacting their communities. Good Call is helping to develop the future tech to advance, support and improve the criminal justice system.

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

Global Intellectual Property Agency

None
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

Global Intellectual Property Agency, LLC is patent service firm whose associates include an experienced team of engineers and patent practitioners whose primary focus is preserving our clients’ intellectual capital. Our firm is agile and committed; we deliver quick turn-around on our services to provide our clients the products they seek in a short timeframe. From the start, we review your ideas and determine the level of prior patent material that exists using our in-house developed search tools. We recommend the best course of action based on those results. We then represent our clients before the United State Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in all steps of patent process, from provisional/non-provisional patent application filing through prosecution and patent issuance. Our primary focus is to provide the best value for our clients and ensure they obtain the limited monopoly on their intellectual property.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 18
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/good-call-nyc.jpeg
Good Call NYC
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/global-intellectual-property-agency.jpeg
Global Intellectual Property Agency
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
Good Call NYC
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Global Intellectual Property Agency
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Good Call NYC in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Global Intellectual Property Agency in 2025.

Incident History — Good Call NYC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Good Call NYC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Global Intellectual Property Agency (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Global Intellectual Property Agency cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/good-call-nyc.jpeg
Good Call NYC
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/global-intellectual-property-agency.jpeg
Global Intellectual Property Agency
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Global Intellectual Property Agency company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Good Call NYC company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Global Intellectual Property Agency company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Good Call NYC company.

In the current year, Global Intellectual Property Agency company and Good Call NYC company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Global Intellectual Property Agency company nor Good Call NYC company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Global Intellectual Property Agency company nor Good Call NYC company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Global Intellectual Property Agency company nor Good Call NYC company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Good Call NYC company nor Global Intellectual Property Agency company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Good Call NYC nor Global Intellectual Property Agency holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Good Call NYC company nor Global Intellectual Property Agency company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Global Intellectual Property Agency company employs more people globally than Good Call NYC company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Good Call NYC nor Global Intellectual Property Agency holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Good Call NYC nor Global Intellectual Property Agency holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Good Call NYC nor Global Intellectual Property Agency holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Good Call NYC nor Global Intellectual Property Agency holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Good Call NYC nor Global Intellectual Property Agency holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Good Call NYC nor Global Intellectual Property Agency 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