Comparison Overview

Good Fruit Grower

VS

Strand Media

Good Fruit Grower

105 S. 18th Street, Suite 217, Yakima, WA, 98901-2177, US
Last Update: 2025-11-28
Between 750 and 799

Good Fruit Grower is the essential resource for the tree fruit and grape growing industry. Get the top-rated print publication delivered 17 times a year. Good Fruit Grower magazine was established in 1946, and is eagerly read by orchardists and vineyardists worldwide. It covers the growing, packing, handling, marketing, and promotion of tree fruits (apples, pears, cherries, apricots, peaches, nectarines, and plums), as well as juice and wine grape production.

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition: Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Employees: 19
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Strand Media

29577, US
Last Update: 2025-11-24
Between 800 and 849

Strand Media Group is a company of seventeen advertising, publishing and design professionals. We produce 20 publications each year in addition to other printed materials, such as brochures, media kits, rack cards, business collateral material, duratrans, annual reports and newsletters. The company began in 1986 as Strand Magazine, located in Myrtle Beach, S.C. In April 2000, Strand Media Group extended its services into Charleston, S.C., becoming a regional publishing and advertising company with the purchase of Gateway Publications. In July 2002, we launched a new women’s monthly publication, Sasee, which is now expanding throughout the Southeast.

NAICS: 511
NAICS Definition: Publishing Industries (except Internet)
Employees: 15
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/good-fruit-grower.jpeg
Good Fruit Grower
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/defaultcompany.jpeg
Strand Media
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
Good Fruit Grower
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Strand Media
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

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

No incidents recorded for Good Fruit Grower in 2025.

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

No incidents recorded for Strand Media in 2025.

Incident History — Good Fruit Grower (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Good Fruit Grower cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Strand Media (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Strand Media cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/good-fruit-grower.jpeg
Good Fruit Grower
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/defaultcompany.jpeg
Strand Media
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Strand Media company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Good Fruit Grower company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Strand Media company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Good Fruit Grower company.

In the current year, Strand Media company and Good Fruit Grower company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Strand Media company nor Good Fruit Grower company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Strand Media company nor Good Fruit Grower company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Strand Media company nor Good Fruit Grower company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Good Fruit Grower company nor Strand Media company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Good Fruit Grower nor Strand Media holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Good Fruit Grower company nor Strand Media company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Good Fruit Grower company employs more people globally than Strand Media company, reflecting its scale as a Book and Periodical Publishing.

Neither Good Fruit Grower nor Strand Media holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Good Fruit Grower nor Strand Media holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Good Fruit Grower nor Strand Media holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Good Fruit Grower nor Strand Media holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Good Fruit Grower nor Strand Media holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Good Fruit Grower nor Strand Media 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.