Comparison Overview

Leo Cussen Centre for Law

VS

Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein

Leo Cussen Centre for Law

Level 16, 15 William Street, Melbourne, VIC, 3000, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

50 years of excellence in legal education. As Australia’s most experienced legal education provider, we are proud to celebrate our 50th year. During the past decades, we have grown and evolved to ensure we remain relevant in changing social and economic environments without compromising our standards of excellence. Now more than ever, our national presence and the range of programs available demonstrates our commitment, as a not-for-profit institution, to making legal education accessible to even the most remote locations. Our programs are led by experienced legal practitioners and educators, integrating cutting edge developments with best practice legal skills. Our inclusive ethos enables and facilitates collaboration of the best kind. Through a range of activities and industry engagement, we connect, we listen, we learn, so that our insights motivate strong leadership within the law.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 147
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein

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

Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein is a civil rights and criminal defense firm, dedicated to the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. We represent clients in our criminal practice in Ohio and federal criminal cases. Our civil rights practice focuses on police brutality and misconduct, innocence claims and wrongful imprisonment, and other government misconduct.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 15
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/leo-cussen-centre-for-law.jpeg
Leo Cussen Centre for Law
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/fggfirm.jpeg
Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein
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
Leo Cussen Centre for Law
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Leo Cussen Centre for Law in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein in 2025.

Incident History — Leo Cussen Centre for Law (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Leo Cussen Centre for Law cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/leo-cussen-centre-for-law.jpeg
Leo Cussen Centre for Law
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/fggfirm.jpeg
Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Leo Cussen Centre for Law company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Leo Cussen Centre for Law company.

In the current year, Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company and Leo Cussen Centre for Law company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company nor Leo Cussen Centre for Law company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company nor Leo Cussen Centre for Law company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company nor Leo Cussen Centre for Law company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law company nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law company nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Leo Cussen Centre for Law company employs more people globally than Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Leo Cussen Centre for Law nor Friedman, Gilbert + Gerhardstein 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