Comparison Overview

Iconotech

VS

Signs.com

Iconotech

460 Woodland Ave, Bloomfield, 06002, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Iconotech was founded in 1992 by the new owners of a duplicator and mimeograph supplies company in Chicago. With previous experience in the early days of large character ink jet printing in Europe while working for a U.S. based packaging company, their vision was to grow a new business in the packaging market for case marking and coding. The relentless pursuit of a digital printing technology that is significantly more durable and less expensive than printing plates, ink jet, preprints and other printing methods resulted in the Iconotech systems that we have today.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 11
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Signs.com

1550 Gladiola St, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84104, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Well, technically we are a bunch of sign, design and tech nerds who got together to create the best e-commerce sign site in the known universe. We wanted to create a business with one simple goal - provide the absolute best sign buying experience out there. To do that, we had to create a site with a killer design tool, offer superior customer service and produce the highest quality signs using the best materials. We launched Signs.com in 2012 with the backing of Ferrari Color. Who? Well you might not know or care who they are, but Pottery Barn, Starbucks and Lucky Brand sure do. In fact, those are only a few of the companies who use Ferrari Color to produce their signs and graphics. The good news is, because Ferrari Color is our production partner, the same level of quality and detail these awesome companies get is now available to individuals and small businesses through Signs.com. The Signs.com blog brings you daily insight from successful business owners, guest posts from industry experts and tips to help you get the most out of your signage. We also have how-tos related to the installation, maintenance and care of your professionally produced signs. So come visit us at http://www.signs.com and see the difference!

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 59
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/iconotech.jpeg
Iconotech
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/signs-com.jpeg
Signs.com
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
Iconotech
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Signs.com
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Iconotech in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Signs.com in 2025.

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

Iconotech cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Signs.com (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Signs.com cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/iconotech.jpeg
Iconotech
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/signs-com.jpeg
Signs.com
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Iconotech company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Signs.com company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Signs.com company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Iconotech company.

In the current year, Signs.com company and Iconotech company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Signs.com company nor Iconotech company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Signs.com company nor Iconotech company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Signs.com company nor Iconotech company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Iconotech company nor Signs.com company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Iconotech nor Signs.com holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Iconotech company nor Signs.com company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Signs.com company employs more people globally than Iconotech company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Iconotech nor Signs.com holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Iconotech nor Signs.com holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Iconotech nor Signs.com holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Iconotech nor Signs.com holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Iconotech nor Signs.com holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Iconotech nor Signs.com 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