Comparison Overview

Thomas Printworks

VS

Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc.

Thomas Printworks

600 N. Central Expressway, Richardson, TX, 75080, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17

We started with a focus on traditional blueprints servicing the architecture, engineering, and construction industries. We never would have imagined that our business would now be in its third generation of family ownership and have over 300 employees spanning 25 locations in the U.S. Thomas Printworks hasn’t just survived, but thrived as a leading choice among the A/E/C industry for commercial printing needs. We’ve been able to do so because of how we build relationships with our customers and stay up to date on the latest technology in the trade. We set the standard for our customers rather than following it. Today, Thomas Printworks is a recognized name in the industry with locations also in the Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Phoenix, Minneapolis, Orlando, West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale, and Miami metropolitan areas. When we say It’s All In The Name, we take that personally. Thomas Printworks has lasted over 60 years because of our name and the quality of service our clients expect and rely on from that name. For our Dallas customers, you can even find our original location still in operation after all these years. The technology, processes, and product demands may change, but what won’t change is our dedication to providing friendly and professional service. If you’re ready to bring your printing and document management ideas to life, contact one of our specialists today and we’ll reach back to help you start your next project.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 344
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc.

2600 Chicory Road, Racine, WI, undefined, US
Last Update: 2025-12-18

About Us : Established in 1984, BGS is 100% employee owned company with 175 employee owners suppling OEM & POP decorative graphics. Racine, Wisconsin is home for our 116,000 square foot ISO 9001:2008 certified facility. Services: Our in house services are tailored to meet your needs. Our capabilities include: design, screen-printing, digital printing, flexographic printing, dome coating, metal stamping, hand leafing, product development, commodity management at our customer’s production facility. Products: Pressure sensitive decals, POP signage, caution/warning decals,metal nameplates, multicolor roll striping, pressure sensitive roll labels, waterslide decals and gold leaf decals. Key Markets: OEM, RV, motorcycle, appliance, automotive, marine, farm and construction equipment, and point of purchase advertising.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 86
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/thomas-reprographics.jpeg
Thomas Printworks
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/burlington-graphic-systems-inc-.jpeg
Burlington Graphic 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
Compliance Summary
Thomas Printworks
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc.
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Thomas Printworks in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. in 2025.

Incident History — Thomas Printworks (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Thomas Printworks cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/thomas-reprographics.jpeg
Thomas Printworks
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/burlington-graphic-systems-inc-.jpeg
Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc.
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Thomas Printworks company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Thomas Printworks company.

In the current year, Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company and Thomas Printworks company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company nor Thomas Printworks company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company nor Thomas Printworks company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company nor Thomas Printworks company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Thomas Printworks company nor Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Thomas Printworks nor Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Thomas Printworks company nor Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Thomas Printworks company employs more people globally than Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Thomas Printworks nor Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Thomas Printworks nor Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Thomas Printworks nor Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Thomas Printworks nor Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Thomas Printworks nor Burlington Graphic Systems, Inc. holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Thomas Printworks nor Burlington Graphic Systems, 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