Comparison Overview

Process Label Systems Inc

VS

CDP Communications Design Print

Process Label Systems Inc

3615 29th Ave NE, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55418-3237, US
Last Update: 2025-12-11
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.processlabel.com

Process Label Systems Inc is a Printing company located in 3615 29th Ave NE, Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States. We specialize in roll label and tag printing, custom converting as well as sequential numbering, bar coding and QR coding. Our digital printing capabilities include UV Cured CMYKOV inkjet(Domino N610i) We also are a specialty rotary die cutter capable of multiple die and multiple web lamination and reregistration die cutting We run two Delta Mod Tech Servo controlled rotary die cutting/converting machines.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 9
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

CDP Communications Design Print

74-82 Rose Lane, Liverpool, undefined, L18 8EE, GB
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799
http://www.cdp.co.uk

Established in 1974, CDP has over 40 years of experience and is a leading UK supplier of all things print. In 2017 we launched our new brand, this bold new look represents a refreshed outlook for CDP and a drive to remain at the very forefront of innovation in design and printing services. While our look has changed, our values of service and quality remain the same. Specialist areas: Direct Mail, Hybrid Mail, Marketing, Marketing and Advertising Literature, Print Management, Financial print, Labels, Logos, Branding, Layout, Graphic Design

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 32
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/process-label-systems-inc.jpeg
Process Label Systems 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/cdp-print-management.jpeg
CDP Communications Design Print
—
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
Process Label Systems Inc
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
CDP Communications Design Print
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Process Label Systems Inc in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for CDP Communications Design Print in 2025.

Incident History — Process Label Systems Inc (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Process Label Systems Inc cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — CDP Communications Design Print (X = Date, Y = Severity)

CDP Communications Design Print cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/process-label-systems-inc.jpeg
Process Label Systems Inc
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/cdp-print-management.jpeg
CDP Communications Design Print
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Process Label Systems Inc company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to CDP Communications Design Print company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, CDP Communications Design Print company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Process Label Systems Inc company.

In the current year, CDP Communications Design Print company and Process Label Systems Inc company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither CDP Communications Design Print company nor Process Label Systems Inc company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither CDP Communications Design Print company nor Process Label Systems Inc company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither CDP Communications Design Print company nor Process Label Systems Inc company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc company nor CDP Communications Design Print company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc nor CDP Communications Design Print holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc company nor CDP Communications Design Print company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

CDP Communications Design Print company employs more people globally than Process Label Systems Inc company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc nor CDP Communications Design Print holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc nor CDP Communications Design Print holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc nor CDP Communications Design Print holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc nor CDP Communications Design Print holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc nor CDP Communications Design Print holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Process Label Systems Inc nor CDP Communications Design Print 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