Comparison Overview

Norman Waterhouse

VS

Bryan & Company LLP

Norman Waterhouse

431 King William St, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Our ability to exceed client expectations has led to our success in a range of services embracing all aspects of business. The Norman Waterhouse philosophy means that we consider ourselves to be part of your team. We provide legal advice and representation in transactions and dispute resolution to a broad range of clients, both public and private, nationally and internationally. Our people demonstrate considerable skills in commercial and legal environments and are committed to providing advice and solutions that maximise opportunity and minimise risk. Our advice is always focussed on the best strategic outcome. Established in 1920, our partnership is built on values of excellence, integrity and trust. Our people form a cohesive, creative team, and provide timely and effective advice, while remaining sensitive to the commercial realities of the marketplace.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 108
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Bryan & Company LLP

2900 Manulife Place , Edmonton, Alberta, T5J 3V5, CA
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Bryan & Co. is a full-service law firm headquartered in Edmonton, Alberta, providing legal counsel to individuals, public and private companies, and not-for-profit entities across all industries. We advise clients on everything from day-to-day legal matters to transformative transactions and critical disputes. We have built our firm by partnering with our clients—their goals are our goals. We pride ourselves on delivering practical, cost-effective, and bespoke advice for any legal issues they face. Our clients rely on our outstanding technical and communication skills, and we are privileged to have earned their trust.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 91
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/norman-waterhouse.jpeg
Norman Waterhouse
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/bryan-&-company-llp.jpeg
Bryan & Company 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
Compliance Summary
Norman Waterhouse
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Bryan & Company LLP
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Norman Waterhouse in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Bryan & Company LLP in 2025.

Incident History — Norman Waterhouse (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Norman Waterhouse cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Bryan & Company LLP (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Bryan & Company LLP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/norman-waterhouse.jpeg
Norman Waterhouse
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bryan-&-company-llp.jpeg
Bryan & Company LLP
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Norman Waterhouse company and Bryan & Company LLP company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Bryan & Company LLP company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Norman Waterhouse company.

In the current year, Bryan & Company LLP company and Norman Waterhouse company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Bryan & Company LLP company nor Norman Waterhouse company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Bryan & Company LLP company nor Norman Waterhouse company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Bryan & Company LLP company nor Norman Waterhouse company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Norman Waterhouse company nor Bryan & Company LLP company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Norman Waterhouse nor Bryan & Company LLP holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Norman Waterhouse company nor Bryan & Company LLP company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Norman Waterhouse company employs more people globally than Bryan & Company LLP company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Norman Waterhouse nor Bryan & Company LLP holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Norman Waterhouse nor Bryan & Company LLP holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Norman Waterhouse nor Bryan & Company LLP holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Norman Waterhouse nor Bryan & Company LLP holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Norman Waterhouse nor Bryan & Company LLP holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Norman Waterhouse nor Bryan & Company LLP 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