Comparison Overview

AGDA

VS

jackophant

AGDA

Adelaide, 5000, AU
Last Update: 2025-12-03
Between 750 and 799

Australian Graphic Design Association Limited is the peak national organization representing the Australian graphic design industry. With more than 2,600 members distributed throughout the creative, visual communications, applied design and technology sectors, it is dedicated to advancing the profession through an interrelated program of state, national and international activities in education, advocacy and professional development. AGDA is a lead member of the International Council of Graphic Design Organisations, forming a global network of 187 member associations in 56 countries and consultative status with UNESCO, UNIDO, ISO and WIPO. AGDA was founded in June 1988 by a small, dedicated group of Melbourne-based designers. Fifty designers from across Australia marched into history when they joined together on stage at the Mildura Conference to symbolise their solidarity and commitment to its formation.

NAICS: 54143
NAICS Definition: Graphic Design Services
Employees: 79
Subsidiaries: 6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

jackophant

None
Last Update: 2025-12-03
Between 750 and 799

The company started as a platform for myself to investigate various technologies. Through jackophant I have been able to experiment with branding, social media, print media (including miscellaneous homeware, stickers, and apparel), live streaming, web hosting, PC building and a wide range of graphic design, but principally I have been able to experience running a company.

NAICS: 54143
NAICS Definition: Graphic Design Services
Employees: None
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/australian-graphic-design-association.jpeg
AGDA
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/jackophant.jpeg
jackophant
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
AGDA
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
jackophant
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AGDA in 2025.

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for jackophant in 2025.

Incident History — AGDA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AGDA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — jackophant (X = Date, Y = Severity)

jackophant cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/australian-graphic-design-association.jpeg
AGDA
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jackophant.jpeg
jackophant
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

jackophant company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to AGDA company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, jackophant company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to AGDA company.

In the current year, jackophant company and AGDA company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither jackophant company nor AGDA company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither jackophant company nor AGDA company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither jackophant company nor AGDA company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither AGDA company nor jackophant company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither AGDA nor jackophant holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

AGDA company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to jackophant company.

Neither AGDA nor jackophant holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither AGDA nor jackophant holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither AGDA nor jackophant holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither AGDA nor jackophant holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither AGDA nor jackophant holds HIPAA certification.

Neither AGDA nor jackophant holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). Prior to 0.11.1, vllm has a critical remote code execution vector in a config class named Nemotron_Nano_VL_Config. When vllm loads a model config that contains an auto_map entry, the config class resolves that mapping with get_class_from_dynamic_module(...) and immediately instantiates the returned class. This fetches and executes Python from the remote repository referenced in the auto_map string. Crucially, this happens even when the caller explicitly sets trust_remote_code=False in vllm.transformers_utils.config.get_config. In practice, an attacker can publish a benign-looking frontend repo whose config.json points via auto_map to a separate malicious backend repo; loading the frontend will silently run the backend’s code on the victim host. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.11.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

fastify-reply-from is a Fastify plugin to forward the current HTTP request to another server. Prior to 12.5.0, by crafting a malicious URL, an attacker could access routes that are not allowed, even though the reply.from is defined for specific routes in @fastify/reply-from. This vulnerability is fixed in 12.5.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/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

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17, A Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability has been identified in the Angular Template Compiler. It occurs because the compiler's internal security schema is incomplete, allowing attackers to bypass Angular's built-in security sanitization. Specifically, the schema fails to classify certain URL-holding attributes (e.g., those that could contain javascript: URLs) as requiring strict URL security, enabling the injection of malicious scripts. This vulnerability is fixed in 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/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

Gin-vue-admin is a backstage management system based on vue and gin. In 2.8.6 and earlier, attackers can delete any file on the server at will, causing damage or unavailability of server resources. Attackers can control the 'FileMd5' parameter to delete any file and folder.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/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

Portkey.ai Gateway is a blazing fast AI Gateway with integrated guardrails. Prior to 1.14.0, the gateway determined the destination baseURL by prioritizing the value in the x-portkey-custom-host request header. The proxy route then appends the client-specified path to perform an external fetch. This can be maliciously used by users for SSRF attacks. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.14.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/SI:L/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