Comparison Overview

RELAW, APC

VS

Lexician

RELAW, APC

2535 Townsgate Rd, Westlake Village, California, 91361, US
Last Update: 2025-11-25
Between 750 and 799

RELAW, APC was founded in 2015 to provide practical legal solutions for businesses, institutions, and individuals with real estate needs. The services provided are comprehensive, including both real estate transactions and litigation. The firm practices primarily in the areas of Escrow and Title, Subdivision, Estate and Probate, and Landlord-Tenant Law. As a result, our clients include escrow professionals, title companies, real estate developers, lending institutions, real estate professionals, and owners of real property. The primary goals of RELAW, APC are to make sure clients are constantly updated on the status of their case and to inform clients of all options available to them so that they can make an informed decision about how to proceed. The firm provides its clients with the individualized attention offered by a small firm while offering legal resources comparable to a large firm.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 15
Subsidiaries: 1
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Lexician

1015 W Galer St, Seattle, WA, 98119, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Lexician offers consulting, training, and coaching to legal organizations — firms and in-house departments — in project management and operations. Lexician specializes in the emerging field of Legal Project Management; in fact, Lexician founder Steven B. Levy wrote the book on the subject. Lexician trainers have been training attorneys in Legal Project Management for 15 years -- long before it was called "LPM" or became a hot topic. We are the specialists. We teach practical techniques, and our training makes a difference you can use immediately.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 1
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/relawapc.jpeg
RELAW, APC
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/lexician.jpeg
Lexician
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
RELAW, APC
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Lexician
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for RELAW, APC in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lexician in 2025.

Incident History — RELAW, APC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

RELAW, APC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Lexician (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lexician cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/relawapc.jpeg
RELAW, APC
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lexician.jpeg
Lexician
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Lexician company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to RELAW, APC company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Lexician company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to RELAW, APC company.

In the current year, Lexician company and RELAW, APC company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Lexician company nor RELAW, APC company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Lexician company nor RELAW, APC company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Lexician company nor RELAW, APC company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither RELAW, APC company nor Lexician company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither RELAW, APC nor Lexician holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

RELAW, APC company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Lexician company.

RELAW, APC company employs more people globally than Lexician company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither RELAW, APC nor Lexician holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither RELAW, APC nor Lexician holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither RELAW, APC nor Lexician holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither RELAW, APC nor Lexician holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither RELAW, APC nor Lexician holds HIPAA certification.

Neither RELAW, APC nor Lexician 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