Comparison Overview

Peninsula Community Legal Centre

VS

T G Baynes Solicitors

Peninsula Community Legal Centre

undefined, undefined, undefined, undefined, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Peninsula Community Legal Centre is an independent, not-for-profit organisation that has been providing free legal services to Melbourne’s south-eastern communities since 1977. Our head office is in Frankston and branches in Bentleigh, Cranbourne, Frankston North and Rosebud. The Centre helps people use the law to protect and advance their rights, offering free advice on most legal issues, including Family Law, Child Support, Intervention Orders, Infringements, Tenancy and Consumer. Ongoing assistance is targeted to assist clients who are experiencing disadvantage. The Centre undertakes a range of community legal education, community engagement and law reform activities and is active in a number of community and sector networks.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 71
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

T G Baynes Solicitors

Broadway House, Bexleyheath, Kent, DA6 7BG, GB
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Founded in 1895 TG Baynes is one of the largest high street Solicitor Firms in the South East of England and also ranks within the Top Legal 500 Firms in England and Wales. We have offices in Bexleyheath, Dartford and Orpington providing an extensive range of legal services locally, nationally and internationally. TG Baynes currently has 12 Partners and approximately 120 staff. We provide Legal Services to both Business and Individual clients including: Residential Conveyancing, Civil Litigation, Family Law, Employment Law, Personal Injury, Wills, Trusts and Probate for individuals. Commercial Property, Commercial Litigation, Debt Recovery and Employment for businesses. Working for you, your family, your business.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 59
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/t-g-baynes.jpeg
T G Baynes Solicitors
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
Peninsula Community Legal Centre
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
T G Baynes Solicitors
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Peninsula Community Legal Centre in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for T G Baynes Solicitors in 2025.

Incident History — Peninsula Community Legal Centre (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Peninsula Community Legal Centre cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — T G Baynes Solicitors (X = Date, Y = Severity)

T G Baynes Solicitors cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/peninsula-community-legal-centre.jpeg
Peninsula Community Legal Centre
Incidents
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/t-g-baynes.jpeg
T G Baynes Solicitors
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Peninsula Community Legal Centre company and T G Baynes Solicitors company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, T G Baynes Solicitors company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Peninsula Community Legal Centre company.

In the current year, T G Baynes Solicitors company and Peninsula Community Legal Centre company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither T G Baynes Solicitors company nor Peninsula Community Legal Centre company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither T G Baynes Solicitors company nor Peninsula Community Legal Centre company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither T G Baynes Solicitors company nor Peninsula Community Legal Centre company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre company nor T G Baynes Solicitors company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre nor T G Baynes Solicitors holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre company nor T G Baynes Solicitors company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Peninsula Community Legal Centre company employs more people globally than T G Baynes Solicitors company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre nor T G Baynes Solicitors holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre nor T G Baynes Solicitors holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre nor T G Baynes Solicitors holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre nor T G Baynes Solicitors holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre nor T G Baynes Solicitors holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Peninsula Community Legal Centre nor T G Baynes Solicitors 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