Comparison Overview

Metcom, Inc.

VS

Custom Label

Metcom, Inc.

21643 East Nine Mile Road, Saint Clair Shores, Michigan, 48080, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

At Metcom, we save business and governmental agencies time, money and hassle by managing and supplying critical business needs including web stores, print and graphic services, supply chain and technology products, branded apparel, and logo merchandise. We strive to produce an extreme focus on customer support and value. You can trust us to deliver what we promise. That's the Metcom guarantee. Metcom's niche markets include food service & wholesale distribution, libraries, municipal & state government, property management, manufacturing, auto dealerships and district courts. Some of our products: print, labels, office products, mail and online marketing campaigns, personal protective equipment, and promotional and apparel products. Products and services include business printing and forms, online print management, consumable inventory and distribution services, office product programs, branded promotional products, labels, tags and thermal products, branded apparel, commercial printing and mailing services, concept and design, and online brand stores.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 14
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Custom Label

7800 Patterson Pass Rd, Livermore, California, US, 94550
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 750 and 799

Our mission revolves around helping businesses build their brand - one custom label at a time. For nearly 50 years, we have stayed at the leading edge of printing technology to provide creative solutions for the labeling and packaging needs of businesses within different market segments. With our flexographic and digital printing capabilities, we curate customized labels, tags, cartons, and sleeves perfectly fitting for the unique demands of every business.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 48
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/metcom-inc..jpeg
Metcom, Inc.
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/custom-label-&-decal-llc.jpeg
Custom Label
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
Metcom, Inc.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Custom Label
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Metcom, Inc. in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Custom Label in 2025.

Incident History — Metcom, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Metcom, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Custom Label (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Custom Label cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/metcom-inc..jpeg
Metcom, Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/custom-label-&-decal-llc.jpeg
Custom Label
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Custom Label company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Metcom, Inc. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Custom Label company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Metcom, Inc. company.

In the current year, Custom Label company and Metcom, Inc. company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Custom Label company nor Metcom, Inc. company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Custom Label company nor Metcom, Inc. company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Custom Label company nor Metcom, Inc. company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Metcom, Inc. company nor Custom Label company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Metcom, Inc. nor Custom Label holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Metcom, Inc. company nor Custom Label company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Custom Label company employs more people globally than Metcom, Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Metcom, Inc. nor Custom Label holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Metcom, Inc. nor Custom Label holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Metcom, Inc. nor Custom Label holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Metcom, Inc. nor Custom Label holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Metcom, Inc. nor Custom Label holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Metcom, Inc. nor Custom Label 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