Comparison Overview

Lapin & Leichtling, LLP

VS

Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC

Lapin & Leichtling, LLP

255 Alhambra Circle, Coral Gables, Florida, 33134, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Lapin & Leichtling is a civil litigation and trial law firm of Florida licensed lawyers. We represent clients in courts and arbitration proceedings involving disputes spanning many different fields of law. Lawyers at our firm handle insurance coverage and bad faith cases on behalf of both insurance companies and policyholders in a wide variety of insurance areas. These include cases involving commercial property and business insurance, professional liability insurance, commercial general liability insurance, title insurance, and auto insurance policies. Lenders and their loan servicing agents retain our firm to defend them against claims by borrowers arising out of the origination and servicing of their loans, and to represent them in all kinds of disputes arising out the ownership, sale, purchase, and foreclosure of mortgage loans. Among the cases we handle are suits asserting federal Truth in Lending Act violations, claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, state and federal debt collection practices statutory violations, Real Estate Settlement Procedure Act claims, fraud claims, and class actions. We regularly represent clients in construction and design defect cases and in payment disputes arising out of construction projects. Other practice areas include commercial litigation, personal injury and wrongful death cases, products liability, consumer finance litigation, shareholder and partnership disputes, securities arbitration, and real estate disputes.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 6
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC

1625 Broadway, Denver, Colorado, 80202, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Energy. Intellectual. Corporate. Estates. Litigation Practice Areas: - Oil & Gas: Title, Merger & Acquisitions, Transactions - Intellectual Property, Patents, Trademarks, Trade Secrets, Copyrights - Wills, Trusts & Estates - Residential & Commercial Property Development, Disputes, and Transactions - Entity Creation, Modification & Maintenance - Corporate and Personal Immigration - Disputes & Litigation - General Counsel Offices: - Denver, CO - Fort Worth, TX - Houston, TX - San Antonio, TX - Sheridan, WY Our firm constantly strives to obtain and retain quality staff and employees. We seek to find people of diverse perspectives, educations, and backgrounds. We also incentivize our staff to maintain a long term relationship with the firm. This allows us to provide relevant, localized, consistent expertise to our clients in multiple parts of the country. - Texas - Colorado - Connecticut - Florida - Idaho - Louisiana - Montana - Nebraska - New Mexico - North Dakota - Oklahoma - Oregon - Wyoming - Utah - U.S. Patent and Trademark Office - U.S. Southern, Eastern, Western & Northern Districts of Texas - U.S. Court of Federal Claims - U.S. Court of International Trade - U.S. Tax Court - U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit and 5th Circuit - U.S. Supreme Court Our team encompasses a multidisciplinary set of skills that allow the firm to provide comprehensive legal counsel to individuals and businesses.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 68
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/lapin-&-leichtling-llp.jpeg
Lapin & Leichtling, LLP
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/kearney-mcwilliams-davis.jpeg
Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, 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
Lapin & Leichtling, LLP
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lapin & Leichtling, LLP in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC in 2025.

Incident History — Lapin & Leichtling, LLP (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lapin & Leichtling, LLP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lapin-&-leichtling-llp.jpeg
Lapin & Leichtling, LLP
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/kearney-mcwilliams-davis.jpeg
Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company.

In the current year, Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company and Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company nor Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company nor Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company nor Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC company employs more people globally than Lapin & Leichtling, LLP company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, PLLC holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Lapin & Leichtling, LLP nor Kearney, McWilliams & Davis, 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