Comparison Overview

Limage

VS

Yellow Frog Graphics

Limage

51 rue de la République Déville les Rouen, 76250, FR
Last Update: 2025-12-02
Between 750 and 799

Limage ORCHESTRE votre communication, en cohérence avec vos projets et vos ambitions, de sa création à sa maturité, à travers un ensemble de compétences : Audit, Stratégie, Direction Artistique et Design Graphique. Celle-ci prendra vie sur les supports tels que le print, web et vidéo... Par l’activité FREE LANCE, offrez-vous ce savoir faire, pour bâtir et développer votre communication. Par ce travail de collaboration où Conseil et Créativité sont maîtres, la lisibilité de vos futurs outils n’en sera que plus grande ! ... Aujourd’hui pourquoi pas VOUS ! Conception identité visuelle > Edition > Web design > Packaging > Illustration

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 1
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Yellow Frog Graphics

5602 Corporate Dr, St Joseph, 64507, US
Last Update: 2025-12-03

Yellow Frog Graphics is a premier provider of custom vehicle graphics and wraps. We strive to provide top notch service, design, products and installation for your business, organization or personal project. Using leading edge design and installation techniques each one of our orders is tailored to customer specifications to ensure quality, accuracy and timeliness.

NAICS: 54143
NAICS Definition: Graphic Design Services
Employees: 20
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/limage.jpeg
Limage
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/yellow-frog-graphics.jpeg
Yellow Frog Graphics
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
Limage
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Yellow Frog Graphics
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Limage in 2025.

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Yellow Frog Graphics in 2025.

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

Limage cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Yellow Frog Graphics cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/limage.jpeg
Limage
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/yellow-frog-graphics.jpeg
Yellow Frog Graphics
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Limage company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Yellow Frog Graphics company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Yellow Frog Graphics company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Limage company.

In the current year, Yellow Frog Graphics company and Limage company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Yellow Frog Graphics company nor Limage company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Yellow Frog Graphics company nor Limage company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Yellow Frog Graphics company nor Limage company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Limage company nor Yellow Frog Graphics company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Limage nor Yellow Frog Graphics holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Limage company nor Yellow Frog Graphics company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Yellow Frog Graphics company employs more people globally than Limage company, reflecting its scale as a Graphic Design.

Neither Limage nor Yellow Frog Graphics holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Limage nor Yellow Frog Graphics holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Limage nor Yellow Frog Graphics holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Limage nor Yellow Frog Graphics holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Limage nor Yellow Frog Graphics holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Limage nor Yellow Frog Graphics 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