Comparison Overview

Taylor Mexico

VS

Linemark Inc.

Taylor Mexico

Av. Los Encinos 123, El Sabinal Industrial Park, Apodaca, 66645, MX
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

At Taylor Labeling Solutions Mexico, we specialize in the production, warehousing, and distribution of labels tailored to the manufacturing sector, specifically catering to the needs of nearshoring and expanding companies. Our services include label production using digital, flexographic, eight-color process, and screen printing technology. Additionally, we offer technical literature production, name plates, kitting, inventory management, and process enhancement services. We provide comprehensive regulatory and compliance expertise for both the U.S. and Mexico, adhering to standards such as UL, ANSI, and CSA. Our certifications, including ISO 9001, IATF 16949, ISO 14001, and WCA, ensure exceptional quality and compliance across all operations. As part of Taylor Corporation, a global communications company based in Minnesota, USA, we are part of a team of over 10,000 employees operating in 32 states and eight countries. In Mexico, Taylor has been delivering high-quality printed services and products since 2006.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: None
Subsidiaries: 49
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
1

Linemark Inc.

501 Prince Georges Blvd, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, 20774, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799

Linemark is a leading custom book printing and direct mail provider, specializing in variable, on-demand products for associations, corporations, and non-profit organizations. Our 90,000 sq. ft. headquarters—strategically located near both the Washington, D.C. and Baltimore metro areas—leverages cutting-edge technology and data-driven strategies to deliver measurable, personalized results. As one of the nation’s fastest-growing communications companies, Linemark sets the standard for innovative, customer-focused solutions designed to enhance engagement and drive success.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 123
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/taylor-labeling-solutions-mexico.jpeg
Taylor Mexico
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/linemark-printing.jpeg
Linemark 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
Compliance Summary
Taylor Mexico
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Linemark Inc.
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Taylor Mexico in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Linemark Inc. in 2025.

Incident History — Taylor Mexico (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Taylor Mexico cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Linemark Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Linemark Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/taylor-labeling-solutions-mexico.jpeg
Taylor Mexico
Incidents

Date Detected: 4/2018
Type:Breach
Blog: Blog
https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/linemark-printing.jpeg
Linemark Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Taylor Mexico company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Linemark Inc. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Taylor Mexico company has historically faced a number of disclosed cyber incidents, whereas Linemark Inc. company has not reported any.

In the current year, Linemark Inc. company and Taylor Mexico company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Linemark Inc. company nor Taylor Mexico company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Taylor Mexico company has disclosed at least one data breach, while the other Linemark Inc. company has not reported such incidents publicly.

Neither Linemark Inc. company nor Taylor Mexico company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Taylor Mexico company nor Linemark Inc. company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Taylor Mexico nor Linemark Inc. holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Taylor Mexico company has more subsidiaries worldwide compared to Linemark Inc. company.

Neither Taylor Mexico nor Linemark Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Taylor Mexico nor Linemark Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Taylor Mexico nor Linemark Inc. holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Taylor Mexico nor Linemark Inc. holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Taylor Mexico nor Linemark Inc. holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Taylor Mexico nor Linemark Inc. holds GDPR certification.

Latest Global CVEs (Not Company-Specific)

Description

Zerobyte is a backup automation tool Zerobyte versions prior to 0.18.5 and 0.19.0 contain an authentication bypass vulnerability where authentication middleware is not properly applied to API endpoints. This results in certain API endpoints being accessible without valid session credentials. This is dangerous for those who have exposed Zerobyte to be used outside of their internal network. A fix has been applied in both version 0.19.0 and 0.18.5. If immediate upgrade is not possible, restrict network access to the Zerobyte instance to trusted networks only using firewall rules or network segmentation. This is only a temporary mitigation; upgrading is strongly recommended.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 9.1
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Description

Open Source Point of Sale (opensourcepos) is a web based point of sale application written in PHP using CodeIgniter framework. Starting in version 3.4.0 and prior to version 3.4.2, a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) vulnerability exists in the application's filter configuration. The CSRF protection mechanism was **explicitly disabled**, allowing the application to process state-changing requests (POST) without verifying a valid CSRF token. An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this by hosting a malicious web page. If a logged-in administrator visits this page, their browser is forced to send unauthorized requests to the application. A successful exploit allows the attacker to silently create a new Administrator account with full privileges, leading to a complete takeover of the system and loss of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. The vulnerability has been patched in version 3.4.2. The fix re-enables the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` and resolves associated AJAX race conditions by adjusting token regeneration settings. As a workaround, administrators can manually re-enable the CSRF filter in `app/Config/Filters.php` by uncommenting the protection line. However, this is not recommended without applying the full patch, as it may cause functionality breakage in the Sales module due to token synchronization issues.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 8.8
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Model Context Protocol (MCP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious MCP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered automatically without any user interaction besides opening the project in the IDE. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Zed, a code editor, has an aribtrary code execution vulnerability in versions prior to 0.218.2-pre. The Zed IDE loads Language Server Protocol (LSP) configurations from the `settings.json` file located within a project’s `.zed` subdirectory. A malicious LSP configuration can contain arbitrary shell commands that run on the host system with the privileges of the user running the IDE. This can be triggered when a user opens project file for which there is an LSP entry. A concerted effort by an attacker to seed a project settings file (`./zed/settings.json`) with malicious language server configurations could result in arbitrary code execution with the user's privileges if the user opens the project in Zed without reviewing the contents. Version 0.218.2-pre fixes the issue by implementing worktree trust mechanism. As a workaround, users should carefully review the contents of project settings files (`./zed/settings.json`) before opening new projects in Zed.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.7
Severity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
Description

Storybook is a frontend workshop for building user interface components and pages in isolation. A vulnerability present starting in versions 7.0.0 and prior to versions 7.6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, and 10.1.10 relates to Storybook’s handling of environment variables defined in a `.env` file, which could, in specific circumstances, lead to those variables being unexpectedly bundled into the artifacts created by the `storybook build` command. When a built Storybook is published to the web, the bundle’s source is viewable, thus potentially exposing those variables to anyone with access. For a project to potentially be vulnerable to this issue, it must build the Storybook (i.e. run `storybook build` directly or indirectly) in a directory that contains a `.env` file (including variants like `.env.local`) and publish the built Storybook to the web. Storybooks built without a `.env` file at build time are not affected, including common CI-based builds where secrets are provided via platform environment variables rather than `.env` files. Storybook runtime environments (i.e. `storybook dev`) are not affected. Deployed applications that share a repo with your Storybook are not affected. Users should upgrade their Storybook—on both their local machines and CI environment—to version .6.21, 8.6.15, 9.1.17, or 10.1.10 as soon as possible. Maintainers additionally recommend that users audit for any sensitive secrets provided via `.env` files and rotate those keys. Some projects may have been relying on the undocumented behavior at the heart of this issue and will need to change how they reference environment variables after this update. If a project can no longer read necessary environmental variable values, either prefix the variables with `STORYBOOK_` or use the `env` property in Storybook’s configuration to manually specify values. In either case, do not include sensitive secrets as they will be included in the built bundle.

Risk Information
cvss3
Base: 7.3
Severity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L