Comparison Overview

Common Fibers

VS

Zajac LLC

Common Fibers

927 S Homer St, Seattle, Washington, 98108, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Common Fibers designs and develops advanced consumer goods with the industry’s only fully carbon fiber design. Utilizing their patented CF-Lex™ technology, Common Fibers plans to increase access to composites by expanding their use through the design of simple, functional and disruptive products. While becoming the leading name in the carbon fiber consumer goods space, Common Fibers utilizes its team’s expertise to maintain integrity while keeping it simple, doing more with less, and focusing on the customer.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 12
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Zajac LLC

92 Industrial Park Road, Saco, ME, 04072, US
Last Update: 2025-11-27
Between 750 and 799

Zajac specializes in high purity liquid processing and packaging systems for the Food, Dairy, Pharmaceutical, Biotech and Personal Care industries. We offer the following in house services: - Process Engineering - Control systems and plant automation - Skid and process module fabrication - Field piping installation - Plant documentation - Packaging line design and integration. - Start up, calibration, and commissioning services We provide over 35 years of process and packaging design and integration expertise. As a turnkey solution provider, we have the ability to develop a project from concept through completion. Our clients rely on us for our process and packaging experience and our ability to deliver high quality results on fast track projects.

NAICS: None
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 75
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/common-fibers.jpeg
Common Fibers
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/zajac-llc.jpeg
Zajac LLC
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
Common Fibers
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Zajac LLC
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Common Fibers in 2025.

Incidents vs Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Zajac LLC in 2025.

Incident History — Common Fibers (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Common Fibers cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Zajac LLC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Zajac LLC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/common-fibers.jpeg
Common Fibers
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/zajac-llc.jpeg
Zajac LLC
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Zajac LLC company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Common Fibers company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Zajac LLC company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Common Fibers company.

In the current year, Zajac LLC company and Common Fibers company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Zajac LLC company nor Common Fibers company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Zajac LLC company nor Common Fibers company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Zajac LLC company nor Common Fibers company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Common Fibers company nor Zajac LLC company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Common Fibers nor Zajac LLC holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Common Fibers company nor Zajac LLC company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Zajac LLC company employs more people globally than Common Fibers company, reflecting its scale as a Mechanical Or Industrial Engineering.

Neither Common Fibers nor Zajac LLC holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Common Fibers nor Zajac LLC holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Common Fibers nor Zajac LLC holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Common Fibers nor Zajac LLC holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Common Fibers nor Zajac LLC holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Common Fibers nor Zajac LLC holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1, there is a XSRF token leakage via protocol-relative URLs in angular HTTP clients. The vulnerability is a Credential Leak by App Logic that leads to the unauthorized disclosure of the Cross-Site Request Forgery (XSRF) token to an attacker-controlled domain. Angular's HttpClient has a built-in XSRF protection mechanism that works by checking if a request URL starts with a protocol (http:// or https://) to determine if it is cross-origin. If the URL starts with protocol-relative URL (//), it is incorrectly treated as a same-origin request, and the XSRF token is automatically added to the X-XSRF-TOKEN header. This issue has been patched in versions 19.2.16, 20.3.14, and 21.0.1. A workaround for this issue involves avoiding using protocol-relative URLs (URLs starting with //) in HttpClient requests. All backend communication URLs should be hardcoded as relative paths (starting with a single /) or fully qualified, trusted absolute URLs.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 7.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Uncontrolled Recursion vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft deep ASN.1 structures that trigger unbounded recursive parsing. This leads to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) via stack exhaustion when parsing untrusted DER inputs. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

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

Forge (also called `node-forge`) is a native implementation of Transport Layer Security in JavaScript. An Integer Overflow vulnerability in node-forge versions 1.3.1 and below enables remote, unauthenticated attackers to craft ASN.1 structures containing OIDs with oversized arcs. These arcs may be decoded as smaller, trusted OIDs due to 32-bit bitwise truncation, enabling the bypass of downstream OID-based security decisions. This issue has been patched in version 1.3.2.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/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

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. Prior to versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2, working with large buffers in Lua scripts can lead to a stack overflow. Users of Lua rules and output scripts may be affected when working with large buffers. This includes a rule passing a large buffer to a Lua script. This issue has been patched in versions 7.0.13 and 8.0.2. A workaround for this issue involves disabling Lua rules and output scripts, or making sure limits, such as stream.depth.reassembly and HTTP response body limits (response-body-limit), are set to less than half the stack size.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Description

Suricata is a network IDS, IPS and NSM engine developed by the OISF (Open Information Security Foundation) and the Suricata community. In versions from 8.0.0 to before 8.0.2, a NULL dereference can occur when the entropy keyword is used in conjunction with base64_data. This issue has been patched in version 8.0.2. A workaround involves disabling rules that use entropy in conjunction with base64_data.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H