Comparison Overview

OpenEMR

VS

Cimpress

OpenEMR

Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

The OpenEMR Foundation supports OpenEMR, an open-source electronic medical records software that is used all around the globe. We strive to improve the health care delivery system globally by providing low-cost solutions to clinics big and small. Our international users benefit from a royalty-free license with affordable infrastructure solutions available via both Google Cloud and Amazon Web Services.

NAICS: 513
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 2
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
1

Cimpress

Xerox Technology Park, Dundalk, County Louth, A91 H9N9, IE
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Cimpress plc (Nasdaq: CMPR) invests in and builds customer-focused, entrepreneurial, mass-customization businesses for the long term. Mass customization is a competitive strategy which seeks to produce goods and services to meet individual customer needs with near mass production efficiency. Cimpress is a strategically-focused group of more than a dozen businesses, each operating in a largely autonomous manner other than as it relates to the select few shared strategic and corporate activities that we maintain centrally. Cimpress businesses include Drukwerkdeal, Exaprint, National Pen, Pixartprinting, Printi, Vistaprint and WIRmachenDRUCK. Founded by Robert Keane, who remains President & CEO today, the company has been passionate about empowering people to make an impression through individually meaningful, personalized physical products for more than 20 years. To learn more, visit http://www.cimpress.com.

NAICS: 513
NAICS Definition: Others
Employees: 11,485
Subsidiaries: 13
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Compliance Badges Comparison

Security & Compliance Standards Overview

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/openemr.jpeg
OpenEMR
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/cimpress.jpeg
Cimpress
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
OpenEMR
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Cimpress
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for OpenEMR in 2025.

Incidents vs Technology, Information and Internet Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Cimpress in 2025.

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

OpenEMR cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Cimpress cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/openemr.jpeg
OpenEMR
Incidents

Date Detected: 2/2023
Type:Vulnerability
Attack Vector: Unauthenticated File Read, Authenticated Local File Inclusion, Authenticated Reflected XSS
Motivation: Data breach, ransomware attacks
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cimpress.jpeg
Cimpress
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

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

OpenEMR company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Cimpress company has not reported any.

In the current year, Cimpress company and OpenEMR company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Cimpress company nor OpenEMR company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Cimpress company nor OpenEMR company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Cimpress company nor OpenEMR company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

OpenEMR company has disclosed at least one vulnerability, while Cimpress company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither OpenEMR nor Cimpress holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Cimpress company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to OpenEMR company.

Cimpress company employs more people globally than OpenEMR company, reflecting its scale as a Technology, Information and Internet.

Neither OpenEMR nor Cimpress holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither OpenEMR nor Cimpress holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither OpenEMR nor Cimpress holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither OpenEMR nor Cimpress holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither OpenEMR nor Cimpress holds HIPAA certification.

Neither OpenEMR nor Cimpress holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

n8n is an open source workflow automation platform. Versions starting with 0.211.0 and prior to 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0 contain a critical Remote Code Execution (RCE) vulnerability in their workflow expression evaluation system. Under certain conditions, expressions supplied by authenticated users during workflow configuration may be evaluated in an execution context that is not sufficiently isolated from the underlying runtime. An authenticated attacker could abuse this behavior to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the n8n process. Successful exploitation may lead to full compromise of the affected instance, including unauthorized access to sensitive data, modification of workflows, and execution of system-level operations. This issue has been fixed in versions 1.120.4, 1.121.1, and 1.122.0. Users are strongly advised to upgrade to a patched version, which introduces additional safeguards to restrict expression evaluation. If upgrading is not immediately possible, administrators should consider the following temporary mitigations: Limit workflow creation and editing permissions to fully trusted users only; and/or deploy n8n in a hardened environment with restricted operating system privileges and network access to reduce the impact of potential exploitation. These workarounds do not fully eliminate the risk and should only be used as short-term measures.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.9
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

FastAPI Users allows users to quickly add a registration and authentication system to their FastAPI project. Prior to version 15.0.2, the OAuth login state tokens are completely stateless and carry no per-request entropy or any data that could link them to the session that initiated the OAuth flow. `generate_state_token()` is always called with an empty `state_data` dict, so the resulting JWT only contains the fixed audience claim plus an expiration timestamp. On callback, the library merely checks that the JWT verifies under `state_secret` and is unexpired; there is no attempt to match the state value to the browser that initiated the OAuth request, no correlation cookie, and no server-side cache. Any attacker can hit `/authorize`, capture the server-generated state, finish the upstream OAuth flow with their own provider account, and then trick a victim into loading `.../callback?code=<attacker_code>&state=<attacker_state>`. Because the state JWT is valid for any client for \~1 hour, the victim’s browser will complete the flow. This leads to login CSRF. Depending on the app’s logic, the login CSRF can lead to an account takeover of the victim account or to the victim user getting logged in to the attacker's account. Version 15.0.2 contains a patch for the issue.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 5.9
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N
Description

FileZilla Client 3.63.1 contains a DLL hijacking vulnerability that allows attackers to execute malicious code by placing a crafted TextShaping.dll in the application directory. Attackers can generate a reverse shell payload using msfvenom and replace the missing DLL to achieve remote code execution when the application launches.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/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

LDAP Tool Box Self Service Password 1.5.2 contains a password reset vulnerability that allows attackers to manipulate HTTP Host headers during token generation. Attackers can craft malicious password reset requests that generate tokens sent to a controlled server, enabling potential account takeover by intercepting and using stolen reset tokens.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
cvss4
Base: 8.6
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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

Kimai 1.30.10 contains a SameSite cookie vulnerability that allows attackers to steal user session cookies through malicious exploitation. Attackers can trick victims into executing a crafted PHP script that captures and writes session cookie information to a file, enabling potential session hijacking.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cvss4
Base: 8.5
Severity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/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