Comparison Overview

PAIR Project

VS

GLENLAKE paralegal

PAIR Project

98 N. Washington Street, Boston, MA 02114, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Formed in 1989, the Political Asylum/Immigration Representation (PAIR) Project, provides free legal services to asylum-seekers and promotes the rights of detained immigrants in Greater Boston. Our services include pro bono representation of asylum-seekers and detained immigrants​, referrals to reduced-fee ​immigration attorneys, asylum intake, "Know Your Rights"​ presentations in detention centers across MA and in the greater Boston community, and legal trainings. PAIR serves over 1,700 clients a year by recruiting, training, and mentoring ​volunteer attorneys who take PAIR asylum and detention cases. Follow PAIR for up-to-date information on immigration law and policy.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 25
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

GLENLAKE paralegal

325 Welland Avenue, St. Catharines, ONTARIO, L2R 2R2, CA
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Glenlake Paralegal provides legal services to small business and individuals who are looking for an advocate that can deliver results. When you want an advocate, you need a great communicator – and that’s why you want Glenlake Paralegal Services. Glenlake Paralegal is not a high volume outfit. We do not specialize in Highway Traffic Act. We are a small business whose clientele benefits from our world of experience. We are a small business that understands the needs of other small business owners. We at Glenlake Paralegal Services take a proactive approach to your problem. We don’t think the legal system should be inaccessible, or that you should have to pay a great deal to get justice. When we first sit down with you, at our free, initial consultation, Glenlake will work hard to understand what your issue really is, how we can solve it, and make a plan on how to resolve it. We understand you, and we are going to make the court understand you too.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 3
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/pair-project.jpeg
PAIR Project
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/glenlake-paralegal.jpeg
GLENLAKE paralegal
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
PAIR Project
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
GLENLAKE paralegal
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PAIR Project in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for GLENLAKE paralegal in 2025.

Incident History — PAIR Project (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PAIR Project cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — GLENLAKE paralegal (X = Date, Y = Severity)

GLENLAKE paralegal cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pair-project.jpeg
PAIR Project
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/glenlake-paralegal.jpeg
GLENLAKE paralegal
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

GLENLAKE paralegal company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to PAIR Project company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, GLENLAKE paralegal company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to PAIR Project company.

In the current year, GLENLAKE paralegal company and PAIR Project company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither GLENLAKE paralegal company nor PAIR Project company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither GLENLAKE paralegal company nor PAIR Project company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither GLENLAKE paralegal company nor PAIR Project company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither PAIR Project company nor GLENLAKE paralegal company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither PAIR Project nor GLENLAKE paralegal holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither PAIR Project company nor GLENLAKE paralegal company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

PAIR Project company employs more people globally than GLENLAKE paralegal company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither PAIR Project nor GLENLAKE paralegal holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither PAIR Project nor GLENLAKE paralegal holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither PAIR Project nor GLENLAKE paralegal holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither PAIR Project nor GLENLAKE paralegal holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither PAIR Project nor GLENLAKE paralegal holds HIPAA certification.

Neither PAIR Project nor GLENLAKE paralegal 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