Comparison Overview

Davis GCS

VS

STL, Inc

Davis GCS

101 East Robinson Avenue, Barberton, OH, 44203, US
Last Update: 2025-12-12
Between 750 and 799

Commercial sheetfed printer offering complete Graphic Communication Solutions. 104 years of dedicated service and thoughtful performance in the Graphic Arts Industry. Specializing in printing on traditional and synthetic substrates, complete finishing and mailing services all performed in house. Also offering Advertising Specialties/Promotional Products at competative rates. Davis GCS is best know for their speed and ability to produce in the absolute tightest of deadlines.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 18
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

STL, Inc

121 NE Victory Ave, None, Gresham, Oregon, US, 97030-0366
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

STL, Inc manufactures the highest quality labels with efficient, innovative processes designed to reduce waste and eliminate error, making us one of the most reliable label vendors in the market. Our passion for top-notch customer service means a smooth, hassle-free experience and has lead to us being a key partner to our clients’ operations and an ally in driving efficiency and innovation into their production processes. We continually develop and improve processes, which creates value for our clients and brings the cost of label production down. Our innovative high-capacity spooled rolls provide an unmatched value by slashing downtime and saving our customers millions of dollars. As one of the most experienced manufacturers in the industry, STL is honored to partner with some of the world’s most sought after brands in developing label products and processes to meet the needs of the next generation of labeled goods. All of our labels are put through rigorous testing to ensure reliable, consistent quality, perfect function, and durability.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 55
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/davis-printing-company.jpeg
Davis GCS
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/superior-tape-&-label-inc.jpeg
STL, Inc
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
Davis GCS
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
STL, Inc
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Davis GCS in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for STL, Inc in 2025.

Incident History — Davis GCS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Davis GCS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — STL, Inc (X = Date, Y = Severity)

STL, Inc cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/davis-printing-company.jpeg
Davis GCS
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/superior-tape-&-label-inc.jpeg
STL, Inc
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Davis GCS company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to STL, Inc company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, STL, Inc company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Davis GCS company.

In the current year, STL, Inc company and Davis GCS company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither STL, Inc company nor Davis GCS company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither STL, Inc company nor Davis GCS company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither STL, Inc company nor Davis GCS company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Davis GCS company nor STL, Inc company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Davis GCS nor STL, Inc holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Davis GCS company nor STL, Inc company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

STL, Inc company employs more people globally than Davis GCS company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Davis GCS nor STL, Inc holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Davis GCS nor STL, Inc holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Davis GCS nor STL, Inc holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Davis GCS nor STL, Inc holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Davis GCS nor STL, Inc holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Davis GCS nor STL, Inc 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