Comparison Overview

jackophant

VS

Waters

jackophant

None
Last Update: 2025-12-03
Between 750 and 799

The company started as a platform for myself to investigate various technologies. Through jackophant I have been able to experiment with branding, social media, print media (including miscellaneous homeware, stickers, and apparel), live streaming, web hosting, PC building and a wide range of graphic design, but principally I have been able to experience running a company.

NAICS: 54143
NAICS Definition: Graphic Design Services
Employees: None
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Waters

Axis 6, Axis Court, Swansea, City and County of Swansea, SA7 0AJ, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-03

Amplifying your brand and digital presence through exceptional creativity and insight. Waters Creative was founded on a passion for design. We believe that great design can make a real difference in the world and we’re committed to creating brands and user experiences that are both beautiful and functional. Over the years, we’ve developed a deep understanding of human behaviour and how to create designs that are equally engaging and effective. We use this knowledge to generate designs that are more than just aesthetically pleasing. We want our creativity help you achieve your business goals, whether that’s building brand awareness, generating leads, or selling more products. We’ve had the privilege of working with a wide range of clients, from Welsh Government to the NHS to e-commerce businesses. This experience has given us a wealth of transferable knowledge and expertise that we can bring to your project.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 27
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/jackophant.jpeg
jackophant
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/waters-creative.jpeg
Waters
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
jackophant
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Waters
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for jackophant in 2025.

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Waters in 2025.

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

jackophant cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Waters cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/jackophant.jpeg
jackophant
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/waters-creative.jpeg
Waters
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, Waters company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to jackophant company.

In the current year, Waters company and jackophant company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Waters company nor jackophant company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Waters company nor jackophant company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Waters company nor jackophant company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither jackophant company nor Waters company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither jackophant nor Waters holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither jackophant company nor Waters company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Neither jackophant nor Waters holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither jackophant nor Waters holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither jackophant nor Waters holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither jackophant nor Waters holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither jackophant nor Waters holds HIPAA certification.

Neither jackophant nor Waters holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to 7.1.2-9 and 6.9.13-34, there is a vulnerability in ImageMagick’s Magick++ layer that manifests when Options::fontFamily is invoked with an empty string. Clearing a font family calls RelinquishMagickMemory on _drawInfo->font, freeing the font string but leaving _drawInfo->font pointing to freed memory while _drawInfo->family is set to that (now-invalid) pointer. Any later cleanup or reuse of _drawInfo->font re-frees or dereferences dangling memory. DestroyDrawInfo and other setters (Options::font, Image::font) assume _drawInfo->font remains valid, so destruction or subsequent updates trigger crashes or heap corruption. This vulnerability is fixed in 7.1.2-9 and 6.9.13-34.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 4.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
Description

FeehiCMS version 2.1.1 has a Remote Code Execution via Unrestricted File Upload in Ad Management. FeehiCMS version 2.1.1 allows authenticated remote attackers to upload files that the server later executes (or stores in an executable location) without sufficient validation, sanitization, or execution restrictions. An authenticated remote attacker can upload a crafted PHP file and cause the application or web server to execute it, resulting in remote code execution (RCE).

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

PHPGurukul Billing System 1.0 is vulnerable to SQL Injection in the admin/index.php endpoint. Specifically, the username parameter accepts unvalidated user input, which is then concatenated directly into a backend SQL query.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 6.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Description

NMIS/BioDose software V22.02 and previous versions contain executable binaries with plain text hard-coded passwords. These hard-coded passwords could allow unauthorized access to both the application and database.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L
cvss4
Base: 8.4
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/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

NMIS/BioDose V22.02 and previous versions' installation directory paths by default have insecure file permissions, which in certain deployment scenarios can enable users on client workstations to modify the program executables and libraries.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.0
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 7.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/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