Comparison Overview

ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing

VS

Ideal Printing

ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing

5407 Maple Springs Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75235, US
Last Update: 2025-12-14
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.servicemarkonline.com

ServiceMark Communications specializes in printing and marketing services for professional pest control businesses. We offer all types of stock and custom pest control business forms and marketing products. From invoices, service agreements, work orders, statements, wdi reports to brochures, business cards, postcards, sales flyers, promotional product customer giveaways, we've got all of your pest management business marketing and printing needs covered. Call us at 1-866-782-6275 to learn how we can help you grow your pest control business while saving money and developing a consistent brand image.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 3
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Ideal Printing

400 S Nine Mound Rd, Verona, WI, 53593, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799
http://www.printideal.com

Our print shop is a full service printer, which means we can do just about anything. In addition to printing we provide the following services to help you complete your project. • Booklet Binding • Cutting • Design & Document Creation • Digital Output of Files • Drilling Holes • Foil Stamping • Folding • Numbering • Perforation • Pickup and Delivery • Scanning • Scoring and Slitting • Shipping and Delivery • Shrink Wrapping • Stapling

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 36
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/servicemark-communications-printing-&-marketing.jpeg
ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing
—
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/wh-printing-inc..jpeg
Ideal Printing
—
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
ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Ideal Printing
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Ideal Printing in 2025.

Incident History — ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing (X = Date, Y = Severity)

ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Ideal Printing (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Ideal Printing cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/servicemark-communications-printing-&-marketing.jpeg
ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/wh-printing-inc..jpeg
Ideal Printing
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Ideal Printing company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Ideal Printing company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company.

In the current year, Ideal Printing company and ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Ideal Printing company nor ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Ideal Printing company nor ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Ideal Printing company nor ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company nor Ideal Printing company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing nor Ideal Printing holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company nor Ideal Printing company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Ideal Printing company employs more people globally than ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing nor Ideal Printing holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing nor Ideal Printing holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing nor Ideal Printing holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing nor Ideal Printing holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing nor Ideal Printing holds HIPAA certification.

Neither ServiceMark Communications Printing & Marketing nor Ideal Printing 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