Comparison Overview

Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys

VS

Baker & Company

Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys

10th Floor, Tower D, Minsheng Financial Center,, Beijing, undefined, 100005, CN
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys, founded in 1995, is a comprehensive IP firm licensed by China Patent Office primarily focusing on foreign IP service. Our practice covers all aspects of Intellectual Property laws, including patent, trademark and copyright, and encompasses all phases of administrative and judicial services such as pursuing, maintaining and licensing. Our expertise fields cover all natural sciences in biotechnology, pharmaceutical, chemistry, computer hardware and software, semiconductor, telecommunication, microelectronics, mechanical engineering, and electronic engineering etc. We have over 200 employees, including around 80 patent attorneys and 30 patent engineers, 10 trademark attorneys, 5 attorneys-at-law, 28 administrative and civil agents ad litem approved by the Supreme People’ s Court, 3 foreign patent attorneys and several foreign experts.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 27
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Baker & Company

130 Adeleide St. West Suite 3300, Toronto, Ontario, M5H 3P5, CA
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Baker & Company is a professional law practice operated by a team of lawyers and law clerks having complementary skills. We are a best value alternative to large downtown law firms; our fee structure is deliberately 20% lower than theirs. Whether you are local or further away, our service guarantee ensures that when you engage us, the work is complete within your time requirements.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 18
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/tee-&-howe-intellectual-property-attorneys.jpeg
Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys
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/baker-&-company.jpeg
Baker & Company
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
Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Baker & Company
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Baker & Company in 2025.

Incident History — Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Baker & Company (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Baker & Company cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tee-&-howe-intellectual-property-attorneys.jpeg
Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/baker-&-company.jpeg
Baker & Company
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Baker & Company company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Baker & Company company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company.

In the current year, Baker & Company company and Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Baker & Company company nor Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Baker & Company company nor Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Baker & Company company nor Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company nor Baker & Company company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys nor Baker & Company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company nor Baker & Company company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys company employs more people globally than Baker & Company company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys nor Baker & Company holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys nor Baker & Company holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys nor Baker & Company holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys nor Baker & Company holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys nor Baker & Company holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Tee & Howe Intellectual Property Attorneys nor Baker & Company 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