Comparison Overview

McKenna

VS

Tecmach

McKenna

2815 Falls Ave., Waterloo, Iowa, 50701, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Established in 1969, McKenna has been a leader in printing services dedicated to the photographic community for over five decades. Our roots are firmly planted in the heart of Iowa, but our services extend across all of the United States and internationally. Our commitment to excellence in products, service, and delivery has made us a trusted partner for professional photographers everywhere.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 22
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Tecmach

Av. Luiz Seraphico Júnior, 511, São Paulo, SP, 04729-080, BR
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

A Tecmach é uma empresa especializada em Outsourcing de Impressão e soluções, com mais de 25 anos de mercado e abrangência nacional. Atualmente conta com cerca de 150 colaboradores e administra em torno de 40 milhões de páginas por mês. Mantém parceria com grandes fabricantes do mercado como LEXMARK, RICOH, EPSON, NDDigital, entre outros.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 93
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/mckenna-pro.jpeg
McKenna
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/tecmach.jpeg
Tecmach
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
McKenna
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Tecmach
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for McKenna in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Tecmach in 2025.

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

McKenna cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Tecmach cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/mckenna-pro.jpeg
McKenna
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/tecmach.jpeg
Tecmach
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

Historically, Tecmach company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to McKenna company.

In the current year, Tecmach company and McKenna company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Tecmach company nor McKenna company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Tecmach company nor McKenna company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Tecmach company nor McKenna company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither McKenna company nor Tecmach company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither McKenna nor Tecmach holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither McKenna company nor Tecmach company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Tecmach company employs more people globally than McKenna company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither McKenna nor Tecmach holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither McKenna nor Tecmach holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither McKenna nor Tecmach holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither McKenna nor Tecmach holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither McKenna nor Tecmach holds HIPAA certification.

Neither McKenna nor Tecmach holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Nagios XI versions prior to 2026R1.1 are vulnerable to local privilege escalation due to an unsafe interaction between sudo permissions and application file permissions. A user‑accessible maintenance script may be executed as root via sudo and includes an application file that is writable by a lower‑privileged user. A local attacker with access to the application account can modify this file to introduce malicious code, which is then executed with elevated privileges when the script is run. Successful exploitation results in arbitrary code execution as the root user.

Risk Information
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:H/UI:N/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

Out of bounds read and write in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 143.0.7499.147 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Description

Use after free in WebGPU in Google Chrome prior to 143.0.7499.147 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Description

SIPGO is a library for writing SIP services in the GO language. Starting in version 0.3.0 and prior to version 1.0.0-alpha-1, a nil pointer dereference vulnerability is in the SIPGO library's `NewResponseFromRequest` function that affects all normal SIP operations. The vulnerability allows remote attackers to crash any SIP application by sending a single malformed SIP request without a To header. The vulnerability occurs when SIP message parsing succeeds for a request missing the To header, but the response creation code assumes the To header exists without proper nil checks. This affects routine operations like call setup, authentication, and message handling - not just error cases. This vulnerability affects all SIP applications using the sipgo library, not just specific configurations or edge cases, as long as they make use of the `NewResponseFromRequest` function. Version 1.0.0-alpha-1 contains a patch for the issue.

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

GLPI is a free asset and IT management software package. Starting in version 9.1.0 and prior to version 10.0.21, an unauthorized user with an API access can read all knowledge base entries. Users should upgrade to 10.0.21 to receive a patch.

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