Comparison Overview

General Formulations

VS

Greenwell Chisholm

General Formulations

309 S. Union Street, Sparta, MI, 49345, US
Last Update: 2025-12-18

Headquartered in Sparta, Michigan, since 1953, General Formulations is a family-owned, global manufacturer of pressure-sensitive media. General Formulations offers a cross-platform portfolio of products for wide format digital, narrow format digital, screen print, and offset print technologies and is backed by an experienced technical, research & development, and sales teams. General Formulations' corporate headquarters has over 400,000 square feet of manufacturing and converting space to service the ever-growing needs of customers throughout the United States, Canada, Latin America, Asia Pacific, and Europe.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 104
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Greenwell Chisholm

None
Last Update: 2025-12-11
Between 750 and 799

Greenwell Chisholm Printing Company, based in Owensboro, KY, just southeast of Evansville,IN, has had experience in print since 1919. Although starting out as a small local printer, Greenwell Chisholm has grown into a company that does business on a national level, with the latest in computer-to-plate technologies, new generation printing presses, variable data capabilities, full range of mailing services and full Internet capabilities. Greenwell Chisholm is ‘More Than Print!’ Our printing capabilities do not limit us to paper; at Greenwell Chisholm, we can put your logo on anything imaginable! While visiting our site, please take a look at our promotions portfolio and view the many types of products we are capable of printing. Along with our new Cross Media Marketing capabilities, we can take your business to new heights!

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 18
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/general-formulations.jpeg
General Formulations
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/greenwell-chisholm.jpeg
Greenwell Chisholm
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
General Formulations
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Greenwell Chisholm
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for General Formulations in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Greenwell Chisholm in 2025.

Incident History — General Formulations (X = Date, Y = Severity)

General Formulations cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Greenwell Chisholm (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Greenwell Chisholm cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/general-formulations.jpeg
General Formulations
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/greenwell-chisholm.jpeg
Greenwell Chisholm
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Greenwell Chisholm company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to General Formulations company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Greenwell Chisholm company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to General Formulations company.

In the current year, Greenwell Chisholm company and General Formulations company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Greenwell Chisholm company nor General Formulations company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Greenwell Chisholm company nor General Formulations company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Greenwell Chisholm company nor General Formulations company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither General Formulations company nor Greenwell Chisholm company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither General Formulations nor Greenwell Chisholm holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither General Formulations company nor Greenwell Chisholm company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

General Formulations company employs more people globally than Greenwell Chisholm company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither General Formulations nor Greenwell Chisholm holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither General Formulations nor Greenwell Chisholm holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither General Formulations nor Greenwell Chisholm holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither General Formulations nor Greenwell Chisholm holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither General Formulations nor Greenwell Chisholm holds HIPAA certification.

Neither General Formulations nor Greenwell Chisholm 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