Comparison Overview

South Carolina School of Court Reporting

VS

St. Andrew Legal Clinic

South Carolina School of Court Reporting

708 S. Pleasantburg Drive, Greenville, SC, 29607, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

The South Carolina School of Court Reporting is dedicated to maintaining the highest standards. We are very proud of the fact that when our students graduate they are welcomed into the court reporting community because of the knowledge and skills obtained by attending the school. Our training programs provide students with practical knowledge and skills to be competent, professional court reporters. We develop highly prepared, skilled court reporters who are equipped with the expertise to enter the field of court reporting. Founded in 2004 as a court reporting school, The South Carolina School of Court Reporting has since evolved into a training center specializing in the training of court reporters, transcriptionists, voice recognitionists, computer familiarists, WordPerfect specialists, for the expressed purpose of having these legal professionals secure career positions in the related fields in which they desire.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 2
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

St. Andrew Legal Clinic

2950 SE Stark Street, 200, Portland, OR, US, 97214
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

St. Andrew Legal Clinic (SALC) is a non-profit organization that provides family law legal services on a sliding-scale basis to low-income families who might not otherwise have access to legal aid or pro bono legal services but who otherwise cannot afford to hire a private attorney. SALC opened its doors in 1979 and has served more than 60,000 Oregonians.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 20
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/south-carolina-school-of-court-reporting.jpeg
South Carolina School of Court Reporting
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
South Carolina School of Court Reporting
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
St. Andrew Legal Clinic
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for South Carolina School of Court Reporting in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for St. Andrew Legal Clinic in 2025.

Incident History — South Carolina School of Court Reporting (X = Date, Y = Severity)

South Carolina School of Court Reporting cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — St. Andrew Legal Clinic (X = Date, Y = Severity)

St. Andrew Legal Clinic cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/south-carolina-school-of-court-reporting.jpeg
South Carolina School of Court Reporting
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/st--andrew-legal-clinic.jpeg
St. Andrew Legal Clinic
Incidents

FAQ

Both South Carolina School of Court Reporting company and St. Andrew Legal Clinic company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, St. Andrew Legal Clinic company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to South Carolina School of Court Reporting company.

In the current year, St. Andrew Legal Clinic company and South Carolina School of Court Reporting company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither St. Andrew Legal Clinic company nor South Carolina School of Court Reporting company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither St. Andrew Legal Clinic company nor South Carolina School of Court Reporting company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither St. Andrew Legal Clinic company nor South Carolina School of Court Reporting company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting company nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting company nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

St. Andrew Legal Clinic company employs more people globally than South Carolina School of Court Reporting company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic holds HIPAA certification.

Neither South Carolina School of Court Reporting nor St. Andrew Legal Clinic 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