Comparison Overview

Cogar Printing

VS

Kyocera

Cogar Printing

1515 Martin Boulevard, Middle River, MD, 21220, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Cogar Printing was founded in 1982 by Randy Cogar. He began this entrepreneurial venture with 16 years of prior experience in the printing industry. His vision was to help market small area businesses by providing innovative ideas and quality printing. Since then things have continued to grow and a second generation of leadership is in place supporting and enhancing the ideas upon which the company was founded. In 2020, Randy Cogar’s son Todd Cogar took leadership of the business. He is dedicated to continuing his father’s vision by expanding all the services Cogar Printing provides to small and larger businesses alike.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 8
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Kyocera

None
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Kyocera is uw keuze voor al uw printbehoeften. U koopt de printer/multi-functional zelf aan en zorgt zelf voor de toners. Of u kiest voor een prijs per pagina waarbij dan alle toners en het technisch onderhoud zijn inbegrepen. Kyocera is voor op de concurrentie door : * het hoge printbereik en levensduur alvorens een drum dient vervangen te worden * een dynamisch prijsmodel voor kleurenafdrukken waarbij u niet een full-color betaalt maar afhankelijk van de hoeveelheid kleur die u gebruikt

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 9
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/cogar-print-and-graphic-solutions.jpeg
Cogar Printing
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/kyocera.jpeg
Kyocera
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
Cogar Printing
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Kyocera
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Cogar Printing in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Kyocera in 2025.

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

Cogar Printing cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Kyocera cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cogar-print-and-graphic-solutions.jpeg
Cogar Printing
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/kyocera.jpeg
Kyocera
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, Kyocera company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Cogar Printing company.

In the current year, Kyocera company and Cogar Printing company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Kyocera company nor Cogar Printing company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Kyocera company nor Cogar Printing company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Kyocera company nor Cogar Printing company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Cogar Printing company nor Kyocera company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Cogar Printing nor Kyocera holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Cogar Printing company nor Kyocera company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Kyocera company employs more people globally than Cogar Printing company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Cogar Printing nor Kyocera holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Cogar Printing nor Kyocera holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Cogar Printing nor Kyocera holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Cogar Printing nor Kyocera holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Cogar Printing nor Kyocera holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Cogar Printing nor Kyocera 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