Comparison Overview

Rhode Island Center for Justice

VS

Good Call NYC

Rhode Island Center for Justice

1 Empire Plaza, Providence, RI, 02903, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28

The Rhode Island Center for Justice is a non-profit public interest law center that partners with community groups to strengthen existing advocacy and service provision with legal representation and strategy. Our legal practice areas⁠—including housing, immigration, workers’ rights, criminal justice, education, and utility shutoffs⁠—reflect the most pressing needs of low-income people in our state.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 11
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Good Call NYC

7 Marcus Garvey Blvd, Brooklyn, NY, 11206, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 700 and 749

Good Call is a community-centered tech nonprofit based in NYC working to disrupt the cycle of mass incarceration. The organization helps protect the rights of marginalized communities facing excessive and unnecessary arrests and unfair treatment by the criminal justice system. Through a free 24/7 hotline, youth programs, and community outreach, Good Call provides free proactive and/or immediate legal support for those arrested while educating and impacting their communities. Good Call is helping to develop the future tech to advance, support and improve the criminal justice system.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 12
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/rhode-island-center-for-justice.jpeg
Rhode Island Center for Justice
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/good-call-nyc.jpeg
Good Call NYC
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
Rhode Island Center for Justice
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Good Call NYC
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Rhode Island Center for Justice in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Good Call NYC in 2025.

Incident History — Rhode Island Center for Justice (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Rhode Island Center for Justice cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Good Call NYC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Good Call NYC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/rhode-island-center-for-justice.jpeg
Rhode Island Center for Justice
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/good-call-nyc.jpeg
Good Call NYC
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Rhode Island Center for Justice company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Good Call NYC company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Good Call NYC company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Rhode Island Center for Justice company.

In the current year, Good Call NYC company and Rhode Island Center for Justice company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Good Call NYC company nor Rhode Island Center for Justice company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Good Call NYC company nor Rhode Island Center for Justice company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Good Call NYC company nor Rhode Island Center for Justice company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice company nor Good Call NYC company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice nor Good Call NYC holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice company nor Good Call NYC company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Good Call NYC company employs more people globally than Rhode Island Center for Justice company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice nor Good Call NYC holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice nor Good Call NYC holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice nor Good Call NYC holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice nor Good Call NYC holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice nor Good Call NYC holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Rhode Island Center for Justice nor Good Call NYC 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