Comparison Overview

The Lawyers Alliance

VS

Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC

The Lawyers Alliance

None
Last Update: 2025-11-28

Do you find it difficult to select high quality legal counsel? Are there too many choices in law firms? Why use a national law firm, when you can benefit from a local boutique law firm? The Lawyers Alliance was created to provide the general public with a network of boutique law firms. While practicing at separate, unaffiliated law firms, the members of The Lawyers Alliance have each established a reputation for integrity and excellence in their specific areas of concentration. The members of The Lawyers Alliance meet regularly to share information on providing better client service, on improving firm governance and on finding ways to better educate the public about their services. Contact one of the members of The Lawyers Alliance today at www.thelawyersalliance.com

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

Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC

Bailiwick Office Campus, 252 W. Swamp Rd., Suite 15, Doylestown, PA, US, 18901
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Drake Hileman & Davis is a general practice law firm specializing in personal injury law, with offices and locations in Doylestown, Allentown, Bethlehem, Easton and Stroudsburg in Pennsylvania. The firm originated in 1985 and has grown to eight attorneys. Attorneys in the firm are admitted to practice before all Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Federal Courts. Our clients include individuals as well as national corporations, banks, local businesses and religious organizations.

NAICS: 5411
NAICS Definition: Legal Services
Employees: 22
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/the-lawyers-alliance.jpeg
The Lawyers Alliance
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/drake-hileman-&-davis.jpeg
Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC
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
The Lawyers Alliance
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for The Lawyers Alliance in 2025.

Incidents vs Legal Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC in 2025.

Incident History — The Lawyers Alliance (X = Date, Y = Severity)

The Lawyers Alliance cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/the-lawyers-alliance.jpeg
The Lawyers Alliance
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/drake-hileman-&-davis.jpeg
Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both The Lawyers Alliance company and Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to The Lawyers Alliance company.

In the current year, Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company and The Lawyers Alliance company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company nor The Lawyers Alliance company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company nor The Lawyers Alliance company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company nor The Lawyers Alliance company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance company nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance company nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC company employs more people globally than The Lawyers Alliance company, reflecting its scale as a Legal Services.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC holds HIPAA certification.

Neither The Lawyers Alliance nor Drake, Hileman & Davis, PC 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