Comparison Overview

63 Visual

VS

THERE

63 Visual

130 5th Ave N, Jacksonville Beach, FL, 32250, US
Last Update: 2025-12-01

63 Visual is a graphic design studio in Jacksonville, FL specializing in brand development and web design with an emphasis on typography and illustration. With a background of advertising agency art direction and years of experience in the Jacksonville marketplace, an attention to detail and a fanatical passion for design are always maintained. 63 Visual remains active in the business community by continuing design education, organizing business related events and supporting progress in design thinking while striving to enhance the creative culture in North Florida through leadership with AIGA Jacksonville.

NAICS: 54143
NAICS Definition: Graphic Design Services
Employees: 3
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

THERE

69 Abercrombie St, Chippendale, New South Wales, 2008, AU
Last Update: 2025-12-02
Between 750 and 799

THERE creates brands, and the environments that bring them to life. We communicate stories, activate spaces and orientate places – creating more meaningful and emotional connections between people and brands. Your environment creates culture and commitment, influences behavior and can facilitate change. We study usage and conceptual insights to create a sense of place with meaning, story telling and visual impact. Stimulating surroundings encourage big ideas, making a subtle yet significant contribution to the way you think, feel, interact and function. Considering how much time people spend in the spaces they work and play – clearly that’s an investment worth making.

NAICS: 541
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 44
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/patrick-carter-design.jpeg
63 Visual
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/there.jpeg
THERE
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
63 Visual
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
THERE
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for 63 Visual in 2025.

Incidents vs Graphic Design Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for THERE in 2025.

Incident History — 63 Visual (X = Date, Y = Severity)

63 Visual cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

THERE cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/patrick-carter-design.jpeg
63 Visual
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/there.jpeg
THERE
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

THERE company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to 63 Visual company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, THERE company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to 63 Visual company.

In the current year, THERE company and 63 Visual company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither THERE company nor 63 Visual company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither THERE company nor 63 Visual company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither THERE company nor 63 Visual company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither 63 Visual company nor THERE company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither 63 Visual nor THERE holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither 63 Visual company nor THERE company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

THERE company employs more people globally than 63 Visual company, reflecting its scale as a Graphic Design.

Neither 63 Visual nor THERE holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither 63 Visual nor THERE holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither 63 Visual nor THERE holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither 63 Visual nor THERE holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither 63 Visual nor THERE holds HIPAA certification.

Neither 63 Visual nor THERE 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