Comparison Overview

Lemon Yellow

VS

badoc

Lemon Yellow

169 East Flagler Street, Miami, FL, 33131, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01
Between 750 and 799

Lemon Yellow is a creative communications studio in Miami. Day to day we create branding and design. But really we create meaning. By producing work that speaks clearly, concisely and compellingly. Work that is as thoughtful as it is thought provoking. And that is as intelligible as it is intelligent. Otherwise there is no meaning. And without meaning – well, there’s no communication. Since 2005, we’ve given meaning to everyone from charities to the food and drink industry, while our work with some of Miami’s most iconic architectural projects has helped bring new meaning to the city. Oh, and because we work collaboratively, we’ve also made plenty of friends at home and abroad. We’ve contributed to projects in New York and Chicago, and our team regularly attracts talent from as far as France, Denmark and the UK. After all, our relationships are just as meaningful as our work.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 28
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

badoc

None
Last Update: 2025-11-29
Between 750 and 799

Somos um escritório especializado em branding, design e conteúdo. Criamos experiências que geram valor e relevância para marca. Utilizamos design, tecnologia e conteúdo como ferramentas de negócios. Podemos ajudar no posicionamento e arquitetura de marcas, criação de namings e identidades visuais, materiais impressos, embalagens e soluções no ambiente digital. Relacionamento nas redes sociais, criação e gestão de conteúdo. Muito prazer, somos a badoc.

NAICS: 54143
NAICS Definition: Graphic Design Services
Employees: 3
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/lemon-yellow.jpeg
Lemon Yellow
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/badoc.jpeg
badoc
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
Lemon Yellow
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
badoc
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Lemon Yellow in 2025.

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for badoc in 2025.

Incident History — Lemon Yellow (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Lemon Yellow cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

badoc cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/lemon-yellow.jpeg
Lemon Yellow
Incidents

No Incident

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

No Incident

FAQ

Both Lemon Yellow company and badoc company demonstrate a comparable AI Cybersecurity Score, with strong governance and monitoring frameworks in place.

Historically, badoc company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Lemon Yellow company.

In the current year, badoc company and Lemon Yellow company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither badoc company nor Lemon Yellow company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither badoc company nor Lemon Yellow company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither badoc company nor Lemon Yellow company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Lemon Yellow company nor badoc company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Lemon Yellow nor badoc holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Lemon Yellow company nor badoc company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Lemon Yellow company employs more people globally than badoc company, reflecting its scale as a Graphic Design.

Neither Lemon Yellow nor badoc holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Lemon Yellow nor badoc holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Lemon Yellow nor badoc holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Lemon Yellow nor badoc holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Lemon Yellow nor badoc holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Lemon Yellow nor badoc holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

vLLM is an inference and serving engine for large language models (LLMs). Prior to 0.11.1, vllm has a critical remote code execution vector in a config class named Nemotron_Nano_VL_Config. When vllm loads a model config that contains an auto_map entry, the config class resolves that mapping with get_class_from_dynamic_module(...) and immediately instantiates the returned class. This fetches and executes Python from the remote repository referenced in the auto_map string. Crucially, this happens even when the caller explicitly sets trust_remote_code=False in vllm.transformers_utils.config.get_config. In practice, an attacker can publish a benign-looking frontend repo whose config.json points via auto_map to a separate malicious backend repo; loading the frontend will silently run the backend’s code on the victim host. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.11.1.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.1
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

fastify-reply-from is a Fastify plugin to forward the current HTTP request to another server. Prior to 12.5.0, by crafting a malicious URL, an attacker could access routes that are not allowed, even though the reply.from is defined for specific routes in @fastify/reply-from. This vulnerability is fixed in 12.5.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/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

Angular is a development platform for building mobile and desktop web applications using TypeScript/JavaScript and other languages. Prior to 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17, A Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability has been identified in the Angular Template Compiler. It occurs because the compiler's internal security schema is incomplete, allowing attackers to bypass Angular's built-in security sanitization. Specifically, the schema fails to classify certain URL-holding attributes (e.g., those that could contain javascript: URLs) as requiring strict URL security, enabling the injection of malicious scripts. This vulnerability is fixed in 21.0.2, 20.3.15, and 19.2.17.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:A/VC:H/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
Description

Gin-vue-admin is a backstage management system based on vue and gin. In 2.8.6 and earlier, attackers can delete any file on the server at will, causing damage or unavailability of server resources. Attackers can control the 'FileMd5' parameter to delete any file and folder.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.7
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/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

Portkey.ai Gateway is a blazing fast AI Gateway with integrated guardrails. Prior to 1.14.0, the gateway determined the destination baseURL by prioritizing the value in the x-portkey-custom-host request header. The proxy route then appends the client-specified path to perform an external fetch. This can be maliciously used by users for SSRF attacks. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.14.0.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 6.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:N/SC:L/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