Comparison Overview

Forbes

VS

Greenleaf Book Group

Forbes

None, None, Jersey City, NJ, US, None
Last Update: 2025-11-21
Between 750 and 799

Forbes Media is a global media, branding and technology company, with a focus on news and information about business, investing, technology, entrepreneurship, leadership and affluent lifestyles. The company publishes Forbes, Forbes Asia, and Forbes Europe magazines as well as Forbes.com. The Forbes brand today reaches more than 94 million people worldwide with its business message each month through its magazines and 37 licensed local editions around the globe, Forbes.com, TV, conferences, research, social and mobile platforms. Forbes Media’s brand extensions include conferences, real estate, education, financial services, and technology license agreements. Forbes is an equal opportunity employer.

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition: Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Employees: 9,035
Subsidiaries: 3
12-month incidents
6
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Greenleaf Book Group

PO Box 91869, Austin, TX, 78709, US
Last Update: 2025-11-26

Greenleaf Book Group is a publisher and distributor that specializes in the development of independent authors and the growth of small presses. Our publishing model was designed to support the independent author and to make it possible for writers to retain the rights to their work and still compete with the major publishing houses. In addition to the books we publish, we distribute select titles from small and independent publishers to major trade outlets, including bookstores, libraries, and airport retailers. We serve the small and independent publishing community by offering industry guidance, business development, and unmatched production, distribution, and marketing services.

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition: Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Employees: 109
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/forbes-magazine.jpeg
Forbes
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/greenleaf-book-group.jpeg
Greenleaf Book Group
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
Forbes
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Greenleaf Book Group
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Book and Periodical Publishing Industry Average (This Year)

Forbes has 1263.64% more incidents than the average of same-industry companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents vs Book and Periodical Publishing Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Greenleaf Book Group in 2025.

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

Forbes cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Greenleaf Book Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Greenleaf Book Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/forbes-magazine.jpeg
Forbes
Incidents

Date Detected: 11/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 9/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog

Date Detected: 5/2025
Type:Cyber Attack
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/greenleaf-book-group.jpeg
Greenleaf Book Group
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Forbes company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Greenleaf Book Group company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Forbes company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Greenleaf Book Group company has not reported any.

In the current year, Forbes company has reported more cyber incidents than Greenleaf Book Group company.

Neither Greenleaf Book Group company nor Forbes company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Greenleaf Book Group company nor Forbes company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Forbes company has reported targeted cyberattacks, while Greenleaf Book Group company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Forbes company nor Greenleaf Book Group company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Forbes nor Greenleaf Book Group holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Forbes company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Greenleaf Book Group company.

Forbes company employs more people globally than Greenleaf Book Group company, reflecting its scale as a Book and Periodical Publishing.

Neither Forbes nor Greenleaf Book Group holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Forbes nor Greenleaf Book Group holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Forbes nor Greenleaf Book Group holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Forbes nor Greenleaf Book Group holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Forbes nor Greenleaf Book Group holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Forbes nor Greenleaf Book Group holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ThingsBoard in versions prior to v4.2.1 allows an authenticated user to upload malicious SVG images via the "Image Gallery", leading to a Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability. The exploit can be triggered when any user accesses the public API endpoint of the malicious SVG images, or if the malicious images are embedded in an `iframe` element, during a widget creation, deployed to any page of the platform (e.g., dashboards), and accessed during normal operations. The vulnerability resides in the `ImageController`, which fails to restrict the execution of JavaScript code when an image is loaded by the user's browser. This vulnerability can lead to the execution of malicious code in the context of other users' sessions, potentially compromising their accounts and allowing unauthorized actions.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.2
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:H/SI:L/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

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to to verify that the token used during the code exchange originates from the same authentication flow, which allows an authenticated user to perform account takeover via a specially crafted email address used when switching authentication methods and sending a request to the /users/login/sso/code-exchange endpoint. The vulnerability requires ExperimentalEnableAuthenticationTransfer to be enabled (default: enabled) and RequireEmailVerification to be disabled (default: disabled).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Mattermost versions 11.0.x <= 11.0.2, 10.12.x <= 10.12.1, 10.11.x <= 10.11.4, 10.5.x <= 10.5.12 fail to sanitize team email addresses to be visible only to Team Admins, which allows any authenticated user to view team email addresses via the GET /api/v4/channels/{channel_id}/common_teams endpoint

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Description

Exposure of email service credentials to users without administrative rights in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Devolutions Server: before 2025.2.21, before 2025.3.9.

Description

Exposure of credentials in unintended requests in Devolutions Server.This issue affects Server: through 2025.2.20, through 2025.3.8.