Comparison Overview

Acme Printing Company

VS

Howard Press, a FedEx Company

Acme Printing Company

1100 East Main Street, Morristown, 37814, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.acmeprintinginc.com

Acme Printing is the market leader in providing our customers with top-of-the-line digital and offset commercial printing, graphic design, finishing, labels, wide format signs and banners, and now promotional items. Our customers know that even with the proliferation of digital media, printed items such as rack cards, brochures, business cards, and flyers are extremely effective in getting their message out to their marketplace. We offer fast turnaround times, lower costs and the ability to print smaller quantities that allow our customers to target more specific audiences.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 12
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Howard Press, a FedEx Company

undefined, undefined, undefined, 07203, US
Last Update: 2025-12-12
Between 750 and 799
http://www.howardpress.com

What started as humble beginnings in a storefront operation with three employees, Howard Press has become a leader in commercial printing. Whether offset lithography and books or business forms and tab dividers, we offer a complete lineup of printed products - all under one roof. We maintain more than 100,000 square feet of print operations in three New Jersey locations. Plus, as a wholly owned subsidiary of FedEx Office, we are backed by the vast resources of FedEx, as well as by our own expansive network of employees, vendors, and strategic partners. From project inception through distribution, Howard Press has the breadth and depth to deliver exactly what you need - when you need it.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 11
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/acme-printing-company.jpeg
Acme Printing 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
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/howard-press-a-fedex-company.jpeg
Howard Press, a FedEx 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
Acme Printing Company
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Howard Press, a FedEx Company
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Acme Printing Company in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Howard Press, a FedEx Company in 2025.

Incident History — Acme Printing Company (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Acme Printing Company cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Howard Press, a FedEx Company (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Howard Press, a FedEx Company cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/acme-printing-company.jpeg
Acme Printing Company
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/howard-press-a-fedex-company.jpeg
Howard Press, a FedEx Company
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both Acme Printing Company company and Howard Press, a FedEx Company company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Howard Press, a FedEx Company company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Acme Printing Company company.

In the current year, Howard Press, a FedEx Company company and Acme Printing Company company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Howard Press, a FedEx Company company nor Acme Printing Company company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Howard Press, a FedEx Company company nor Acme Printing Company company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Howard Press, a FedEx Company company nor Acme Printing Company company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Acme Printing Company company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Acme Printing Company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Acme Printing Company company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Acme Printing Company company employs more people globally than Howard Press, a FedEx Company company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Acme Printing Company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Acme Printing Company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Acme Printing Company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Acme Printing Company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Acme Printing Company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Acme Printing Company nor Howard Press, a FedEx Company holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Nagios XI versions prior to 2026R1.1 are vulnerable to local privilege escalation due to an unsafe interaction between sudo permissions and application file permissions. A user‑accessible maintenance script may be executed as root via sudo and includes an application file that is writable by a lower‑privileged user. A local attacker with access to the application account can modify this file to introduce malicious code, which is then executed with elevated privileges when the script is run. Successful exploitation results in arbitrary code execution as the root user.

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/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
References
Description

Out of bounds read and write in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 143.0.7499.147 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
References
Description

Use after free in WebGPU in Google Chrome prior to 143.0.7499.147 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
References
Description

SIPGO is a library for writing SIP services in the GO language. Starting in version 0.3.0 and prior to version 1.0.0-alpha-1, a nil pointer dereference vulnerability is in the SIPGO library's `NewResponseFromRequest` function that affects all normal SIP operations. The vulnerability allows remote attackers to crash any SIP application by sending a single malformed SIP request without a To header. The vulnerability occurs when SIP message parsing succeeds for a request missing the To header, but the response creation code assumes the To header exists without proper nil checks. This affects routine operations like call setup, authentication, and message handling - not just error cases. This vulnerability affects all SIP applications using the sipgo library, not just specific configurations or edge cases, as long as they make use of the `NewResponseFromRequest` function. Version 1.0.0-alpha-1 contains a patch for the issue.

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/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
References
Description

GLPI is a free asset and IT management software package. Starting in version 9.1.0 and prior to version 10.0.21, an unauthorized user with an API access can read all knowledge base entries. Users should upgrade to 10.0.21 to receive a patch.

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
References