Comparison Overview

Johnston Clem Gifford

VS

Garman Turner Gordon

Johnston Clem Gifford

1717 Main Street, Dallas, Texas, 75201, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 700 and 749

Our Cause We aim to create superior work through constant evolution. The work matters because the result matters. It matters to our clients, to our adversaries, to our judges, and to our contractual counterparties. We produce superior work by effort and intelligence, but also by challenging standards. We seek continuous improvement, for ourselves and for our clients. Our firm logo reflects this desire for evolution: a deceptively simple origami figure. Origami figures are flexible—they can be plain or ornate, brutal or graceful. They can change from one form to another. The practice rewards patience and demands effort and creativity. Our Mission We strive to attract the most interesting legal work from the most dynamic clients by living our values, applying a timeless work ethic, and developing deep core strengths. In everything we do, we seek to balance the practice of law with the business of law. Our Values Talent, integrity, motivation, professional judgment. Every lawyer should prize these qualities and should apply them in the pursuit of their client’s interests. We consider them “table stakes”—the minimum requirements for participation in the profession. Our lawyers, paralegals, and support and executive staff members share these qualities, but also several less common traits. We measure ourselves against the qualities below—five values that form the foundation of our law firm. • Sense of Urgency. • Obsessive Curiosity. • Collaborative Philosophy. • Clear Communication. • Advanced Technology. Our Niche We have deep expertise in financial services, technology, corporate transactions, and corporate plaintiff representation. Find us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/johnstonclem

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 18
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Garman Turner Gordon

7251 Amigo St, Las Vegas, 89119, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

When you think of Nevada, your first thought probably isn’t nationally recognized, world class legal services. But that is exactly the firm we built. We formed the firm as a cohesive group of 17 lawyers, nearly all of whom have practiced together for a decade or more. We represent businesses and business people in high stakes matters, almost always against the largest and most well respected firms in the country and in our own back yard. We staff our cases with small teams of seasoned lawyers from varied backgrounds and skill sets, the way we would want a firm to operate if we were the client. Our focus is on winning, and winning efficiently, and not the fee generation that comes from using armies of lawyers. We set out to create a boutique firm that is not beholden to financial institutions and large institutional clients. Our lawyers typically started their careers at larger firms and know the consequences of being big: unavoidable conflicts, inefficiencies, and billable hour “requirements” all of which drive a wedge between lawyers and clients. Our model is different, while we work on the traditional hourly model, our preference is to work with clients on creative structures based upon shared risk and value. We regularly work with our clients on hybrid fees, contingency fees and success fees as a means to align our economic interests with those of our clients.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 21
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/johnstonpratt.jpeg
Johnston Clem Gifford
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/garman-turner-gordon-llp.jpeg
Garman Turner Gordon
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
Johnston Clem Gifford
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Garman Turner Gordon
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Johnston Clem Gifford in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Garman Turner Gordon in 2025.

Incident History — Johnston Clem Gifford (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Johnston Clem Gifford cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Garman Turner Gordon (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Garman Turner Gordon cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/johnstonpratt.jpeg
Johnston Clem Gifford
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/garman-turner-gordon-llp.jpeg
Garman Turner Gordon
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Garman Turner Gordon company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Johnston Clem Gifford company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Garman Turner Gordon company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Johnston Clem Gifford company.

In the current year, Garman Turner Gordon company and Johnston Clem Gifford company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Garman Turner Gordon company nor Johnston Clem Gifford company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Garman Turner Gordon company nor Johnston Clem Gifford company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Garman Turner Gordon company nor Johnston Clem Gifford company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford company nor Garman Turner Gordon company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford nor Garman Turner Gordon holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford company nor Garman Turner Gordon company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Garman Turner Gordon company employs more people globally than Johnston Clem Gifford company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford nor Garman Turner Gordon holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford nor Garman Turner Gordon holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford nor Garman Turner Gordon holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford nor Garman Turner Gordon holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford nor Garman Turner Gordon holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Johnston Clem Gifford nor Garman Turner Gordon 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