Comparison Overview

Celloglas

VS

eSigns.com

Celloglas

Business Support, Reading, Berkshire, RG7 4PF, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Celloglas is the UK’s leading specialist in decorative print finishing, making print memorable for brands. Celloglas is a privately owned company with operations in the North, Midlands and South of England and we work with brand owners, marketing agencies, designers, publishers, printers and print management companies nationwide and globally. We offer an extensive range of innovative print finishes, including screen varnishing, lamination, foil blocking, high speed coating, die cutting and folder make up to name just a few -but our real value comes in our expertise to identify what finish will be perfect for what job. We provide a free consultancy service to our clients, knowledge sharing our findings over the years and exploring creative opportunities for clients. So often do we hear 'I'd have never thought of that!"​. We also own and manufacture Mirri, a world leading brand of metallised paper and board, which can be customised bespoke to reflect brand colours and tones. Our finishes are used across POS, publishing, marketing materials and packaging and we love a challenge - so please do task us with how to make your print memorable!

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 32
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

eSigns.com

7729 Lochlin Drive, Brighton, MI, 48116, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

eSigns offers custom signs and banners made-to-order for business use. We work directly with company owners and managers, marketing professionals, graphic designers, event planners, and individual business people to help promote their companies, campaigns, or events. We’ve equipped our production facility with industry-leading sign printing technology to quickly and efficiently turn around your orders. That’s why when you order by 10:00 a.m. EST any weekday, we will ship the same day. Additionally, we are committed to superior, high-quality products. We ensure that our customers receive brilliant, durable signs that will attract customers, hold up for years of promotions, events, and trade shows, and ultimately help grow your business. Whether you need vinyl banners, mesh banners, magnetic signs, or A-Frame signs, we have the products you need at prices you’ll love. We also have the design options you need -- upload your own design or choose from our templates. Plus, order accessories to proudly display your signage. We are confident that you will see the business results you are looking for after ordering custom signs and banners from eSigns.com. Goof Proof, Guaranteed!

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 31
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/celloglas.jpeg
Celloglas
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/esigns-com.jpeg
eSigns.com
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
Celloglas
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
eSigns.com
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Celloglas in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for eSigns.com in 2025.

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

Celloglas cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — eSigns.com (X = Date, Y = Severity)

eSigns.com cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/celloglas.jpeg
Celloglas
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/esigns-com.jpeg
eSigns.com
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, eSigns.com company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Celloglas company.

In the current year, eSigns.com company and Celloglas company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither eSigns.com company nor Celloglas company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither eSigns.com company nor Celloglas company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither eSigns.com company nor Celloglas company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Celloglas company nor eSigns.com company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Celloglas nor eSigns.com holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Celloglas company nor eSigns.com company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Celloglas company employs more people globally than eSigns.com company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Celloglas nor eSigns.com holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Celloglas nor eSigns.com holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Celloglas nor eSigns.com holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Celloglas nor eSigns.com holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Celloglas nor eSigns.com holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Celloglas nor eSigns.com 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.

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
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)

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)

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.

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
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.

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