Comparison Overview

BCM Inks

VS

Yellow Letters

BCM Inks

161 Commerce Blvd, Loveland, Ohio, 45242, US
Last Update: 2025-12-12
Between 750 and 799

Since its inception in the United States in 1988, BCM Inks has been committed to improving the corrugated industry’s direct print capabilities through innovative and environmentally sensitive products, superior technical expertise, and technological advancement. BCM Inks works closely with educators and industry to further the advancement of value-added corrugated postprint. BCM Inks has achieved ISO 9001/2015 certification, is a Sony “Green Partner”, and is an innovator in the development of enhanced ink blending/color management systems.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 28
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Yellow Letters

3400 Unicorn Rd. Suite 113, Bakersfield, California, 93308, US
Last Update: 2025-12-18

We are committed to providing our customers with easy, quick, and affordable online ordering for print materials. We combine that convenience and affordability with friendly and knowledgeable customer support. Whether it's your first time ordering from us, or you've been buying from us for years, we know that you may have technical or other questions. You may also find it faster to call customer support at (661) 864-7860. Explain your situation to one of our friendly staff and help will be on its way. Thank you.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 3
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/bcm-inks.jpeg
BCM Inks
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/yellow-letters.jpeg
Yellow Letters
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
BCM Inks
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Yellow Letters
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BCM Inks in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Yellow Letters in 2025.

Incident History — BCM Inks (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BCM Inks cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Yellow Letters (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Yellow Letters cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bcm-inks.jpeg
BCM Inks
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/yellow-letters.jpeg
Yellow Letters
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Both BCM Inks company and Yellow Letters company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, Yellow Letters company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to BCM Inks company.

In the current year, Yellow Letters company and BCM Inks company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Yellow Letters company nor BCM Inks company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Yellow Letters company nor BCM Inks company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Yellow Letters company nor BCM Inks company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither BCM Inks company nor Yellow Letters company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither BCM Inks nor Yellow Letters holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither BCM Inks company nor Yellow Letters company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

BCM Inks company employs more people globally than Yellow Letters company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither BCM Inks nor Yellow Letters holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither BCM Inks nor Yellow Letters holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither BCM Inks nor Yellow Letters holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither BCM Inks nor Yellow Letters holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither BCM Inks nor Yellow Letters holds HIPAA certification.

Neither BCM Inks nor Yellow Letters holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Zerobyte is a backup automation tool Zerobyte versions prior to 0.18.5 and 0.19.0 contain an authentication bypass vulnerability where authentication middleware is not properly applied to API endpoints. This results in certain API endpoints being accessible without valid session credentials. This is dangerous for those who have exposed Zerobyte to be used outside of their internal network. A fix has been applied in both version 0.19.0 and 0.18.5. If immediate upgrade is not possible, restrict network access to the Zerobyte instance to trusted networks only using firewall rules or network segmentation. This is only a temporary mitigation; upgrading is strongly recommended.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Open Source Point of Sale (opensourcepos) is a web based point of sale application written in PHP using CodeIgniter framework. Starting in version 3.4.0 and prior to version 3.4.2, a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the application's filter configuration. The CSRF protection mechanism was **explicitly disabled**, allowing the application to process state-changing requests (POST) without verifying a valid CSRF token. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this by hosting a malicious web page. If a logged-in administrator visits this page, their browser is forced to send unauthorized requests to the application. A successful exploit allows the attacker to silently create a new Administrator account with full privileges, leading to a complete takeover of the system and loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The vulnerability has been patched in version 3.4.2. The fix re-enables the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` and resolves associated AJAX race conditions by adjusting token regeneration settings. As a workaround, administrators can manually re-enable the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` by uncommenting the protection line. However, this is not recommended without applying the full patch, as it may cause functionality breakage in the Sales module due to token synchronization issues.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Model Context Protocol (MCP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious MCP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered automatically without any user interaction besides opening the project in the IDE. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Language Server Protocol (LSP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious LSP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered when a user opens project file for which there is an LSP entry. A concerted effort by an attacker to seed a project settings file (`./zed/settings.json`) with malicious language server configurations could result in arbitrary code execution with the user's privileges if the user opens the project in Zed without reviewing the contents. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Storybook is a frontend workshop for building user interface components and pages in isolation. A vulnerability present starting in versions 7.0.0 and prior to versions 7.6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, and 10.1.10 relates to Storybook’s handling of environment variables defined in a `.env` file, which could, in specific circumstances, lead to those variables being unexpectedly bundled into the artifacts created by the `storybook build` command. When a built Storybook is published to the web, the bundle’s source is viewable, thus potentially exposing those variables to anyone with access. For a project to potentially be vulnerable to this issue, it must build the Storybook (i.e. run `storybook build` directly or indirectly) in a directory that contains a `.env` file (including variants like `.env.local`) and publish the built Storybook to the web. Storybooks built without a `.env` file at build time are not affected, including common CI-based builds where secrets are provided via platform environment variables rather than `.env` files. Storybook runtime environments (i.e. `storybook dev`) are not affected. Deployed applications that share a repo with your Storybook are not affected. Users should upgrade their Storybook—on both their local machines and CI environment—to version .6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, or 10.1.10 as soon as possible. Maintainers additionally recommend that users audit for any sensitive secrets provided via `.env` files and rotate those keys. Some projects may have been relying on the undocumented behavior at the heart of this issue and will need to change how they reference environment variables after this update. If a project can no longer read necessary environmental variable values, either prefix the variables with `STORYBOOK_` or use the `env` property in Storybook’s configuration to manually specify values. In either case, do not include sensitive secrets as they will be included in the built bundle.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L