Comparison Overview

YAM International

VS

Select Impressions

YAM International

Profsoyuznaya 57, Moscow, RU
Last Update: 2025-12-17
View Profile
Between 800 and 849
http://www.yam.ru

YAM International (CIS) – one of the most experienced companies on the printing market in Russia and nearest countries. Our company was founded on May 23, 1989, thus, more than 20 years we deliver the advanced decisions for all types of printing production. The conclusion in 1998 of distribution agreements with Japanese corporations FujiFilm (pre-printing equipment, expendables) and Komori (printing machines) became an important milestone in the history of YAM International (CIS). We are proud that our approach to business is demanded by domestic printers. Actually the number of our clients includes more than one and a half thousand printing houses, and their considerable part, having once chosen YAM International (CIS) as the partner, continues cooperation with us. Fundamental principles of work in the company – quality, reliability, honesty, and we daily prove the commitment to them concrete affairs. We are sure that the success of our clients is our success. Our task – to advance expectations of clients, helping to make their business the most effective!

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 90
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Select Impressions

2215 Claxter Road NE, Salem, 97301, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799
http://www.selectimpressions.com

With roots in the Northwest dating back to the 1880s, Select Impressions has been operating with the experience of current ownership for over 25 years. Our team delivers a full suite of technology that includes offset and digital printing, fulfillment, mailing, multichannel campaigns and web application design. Select Impressions brings the tools of big business to any market with a focus on quality and customer experience.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 15
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/yam-international.jpeg
YAM International
—
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/select-impressions.jpeg
Select Impressions
—
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
YAM International
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Select Impressions
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for YAM International in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Select Impressions in 2025.

Incident History — YAM International (X = Date, Y = Severity)

YAM International cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Select Impressions (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Select Impressions cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/yam-international.jpeg
YAM International
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/select-impressions.jpeg
Select Impressions
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

YAM International company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Select Impressions company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Select Impressions company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to YAM International company.

In the current year, Select Impressions company and YAM International company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Select Impressions company nor YAM International company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Select Impressions company nor YAM International company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Select Impressions company nor YAM International company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither YAM International company nor Select Impressions company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither YAM International nor Select Impressions holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither YAM International company nor Select Impressions company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

YAM International company employs more people globally than Select Impressions company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither YAM International nor Select Impressions holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither YAM International nor Select Impressions holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither YAM International nor Select Impressions holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither YAM International nor Select Impressions holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither YAM International nor Select Impressions holds HIPAA certification.

Neither YAM International nor Select Impressions 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