Comparison Overview

United Graphics

VS

BFC

United Graphics

undefined, undefined, undefined, 77041, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17

Printing has become over the years more of a necessity for businesses whether it is with advertising projects or news about special events going on within your organization. It is a business necessity to be able to communicate through this channel of communication. Just a little insight within our organization, the majority of our client base are through brokerages, yet we are open to not only those within the trade, but anyone seeking a quality printer for wholesale prices. These prices are ready for our clients to either mark-up or just savings to pass along. We welcome anyone and everyone to come and visit our facilities, you can come and get the samples pertaining to work done at your office, or just to take a tour, we would be more than happy to do that for you.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 41
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0

BFC

1051 N. Kirk Rd., Batavia, IL, 60510, US
Last Update: 2025-12-10
Between 750 and 799

BFC utilizes an integrated & innovative approach to print and digital marketing. We are experts in marketing fulfillment services, field sales support and 3PL pick, pack & fulfillment solutions. Our kitting capabilities can handle simple item consolidation to complicated product builds. BFC is a family owned high-powered solution provider behind your brand.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 104
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/united-graphics.jpeg
United Graphics
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/bfc-print.jpeg
BFC
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
United Graphics
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
BFC
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for United Graphics in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for BFC in 2025.

Incident History — United Graphics (X = Date, Y = Severity)

United Graphics cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — BFC (X = Date, Y = Severity)

BFC cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/united-graphics.jpeg
United Graphics
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/bfc-print.jpeg
BFC
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

United Graphics company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to BFC company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, BFC company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to United Graphics company.

In the current year, BFC company and United Graphics company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither BFC company nor United Graphics company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither BFC company nor United Graphics company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither BFC company nor United Graphics company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither United Graphics company nor BFC company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither United Graphics nor BFC holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither United Graphics company nor BFC company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

BFC company employs more people globally than United Graphics company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither United Graphics nor BFC holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither United Graphics nor BFC holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither United Graphics nor BFC holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither United Graphics nor BFC holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither United Graphics nor BFC holds HIPAA certification.

Neither United Graphics nor BFC 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.

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
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)

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)

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.

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
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.

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