Comparison Overview

Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP

VS

QMR Conveyancing

Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP

80 Pine Street, New York, 10005, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 700 and 749

The law firm of STRONGIN ROTHMAN & ABRAMS, LLP, established in 1999, is a full service civil litigation firm providing personalized representation to corporations and individuals, with a concentration in tort, commercial and employment law. The firm has offices at 80 Pine Street, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10005, and at 70 South Orange Avenue, Suite 215, Livingston, NJ 07039.

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

QMR Conveyancing

182 Gilles St, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, AU
Last Update: 2025-11-28

QMR is an Adelaide-based conveyancing practice founded by a team well-versed in commercial law and South Australian real estate. We are dedicated towards property conveyancing and commercial leases, and our goal is to provide quality conveyancing service and legal documents by an experienced commercial lawyer at a low, fixed cost. We have serviced many commercial and residential property owners as we are trusted and recommended by a number of South Australian real estate agencies. We strive to stand out and deliver a seamless experience by establishing and maintaining long-term client relationships. Ching Cao leads the team, drawing on experience as a commercial lawyer locally in Adelaide as well as in Melbourne. Her enthusiasm and interest reflect seamlessly in her work and sets a mantra for QMR to follow.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 6
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/strongin-rothman-&-abrams-llp.jpeg
Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP
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/qmr-conveyancing.jpeg
QMR Conveyancing
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
Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
QMR Conveyancing
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for QMR Conveyancing in 2025.

Incident History — Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — QMR Conveyancing (X = Date, Y = Severity)

QMR Conveyancing cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/strongin-rothman-&-abrams-llp.jpeg
Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/qmr-conveyancing.jpeg
QMR Conveyancing
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

QMR Conveyancing company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, QMR Conveyancing company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company.

In the current year, QMR Conveyancing company and Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither QMR Conveyancing company nor Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither QMR Conveyancing company nor Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither QMR Conveyancing company nor Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company nor QMR Conveyancing company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP nor QMR Conveyancing holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company nor QMR Conveyancing company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP company employs more people globally than QMR Conveyancing company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP nor QMR Conveyancing holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP nor QMR Conveyancing holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP nor QMR Conveyancing holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP nor QMR Conveyancing holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP nor QMR Conveyancing holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Strongin Rothman & Abrams, LLP nor QMR Conveyancing 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