Comparison Overview

PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail.

VS

Hyde Park Label

PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail.

920 SW 9th Ave, Amarillo, Texas, 79101, US
Last Update: 2025-12-11
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.pps-mail.net

PPS & Zip Print combine design, print and mail experts under one roof with a unique flow of skills to work with your budget, meet your deadline, and extend excellent customer service for great results. PPS / Zip Print have joined forces to enhance our print and design services, ensuring we meet the needs of the Midland, Odessa, Lubbock, and Amarillo communities, as well as reaching into other Texas cities and beyond. Together, we are passionately dedicated to not just meeting, but exceeding the expectations of our valued customers. PPS / Zip Print 920 SW 9th Street Amarillo, Texas 79101 Office: 806.373.5919 Plains Presort Services 1418 Crickets Avenue Lubbock, Texas 79401 Office: 806.762.2224

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 42
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Hyde Park Label

4031 Guadalupe, Austin, TX, 78751, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799
http://www.hydeparklabel.com

Austin’s premier label printing company For more than 25 years, Hyde Park Label has been serving businesses in central Texas and throughout the country. Our friendly professionals in sales, graphic design, prepress and printing offer expert advice and the highest quality original graphic design to help you create the best possible label. From 1-color to 8-color labels, Hyde Park Label gives you the best quality, reduced cost and efficiency combined with the friendliest, most knowledgeable service in the industry. Guaranteed. Call us today at 1-800-290-8580.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 2
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/pps-mail-ltd-.jpeg
PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail.
—
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/hyde-park-label.jpeg
Hyde Park 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
PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail.
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Hyde Park Label
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Hyde Park Label in 2025.

Incident History — PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

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

Hyde Park Label cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/pps-mail-ltd-.jpeg
PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail.
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/hyde-park-label.jpeg
Hyde Park Label
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Hyde Park Label company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Hyde Park Label company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company.

In the current year, Hyde Park Label company and PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Hyde Park Label company nor PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Hyde Park Label company nor PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Hyde Park Label company nor PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company nor Hyde Park Label company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. nor Hyde Park Label holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company nor Hyde Park Label company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. company employs more people globally than Hyde Park Label company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. nor Hyde Park Label holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. nor Hyde Park Label holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. nor Hyde Park Label holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. nor Hyde Park Label holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. nor Hyde Park Label holds HIPAA certification.

Neither PPS / Zip Print - Design. Print. Mail. nor Hyde Park 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.

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
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
References
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)

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
References
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)

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
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
References
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.

Published
Date
2025-12-16
Updated
Date
2025-12-16
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
References