Comparison Overview

Zealand Packaging

VS

Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company

Zealand Packaging

Bygmarken 19, Farum, DK, 3520
Last Update: 2025-12-17
View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://zealandpackaging.dk

Zealand Packaging tilbyder emballageløsninger i karton og bølgepap – individuelt tilpasset til kundens behov. Da vi er ordreproducerende har vi ikke noget fast lager – og derfor heller ingen omkostninger forbundet med lagerføring. Hos os er hver ordre unik. Vi er din grafiske partner som sikrer, at du får løst din opgave til tiden - og samtidig sparer tid og omkostninger, når det gælder design, udvikling og produktion af grafiske løsninger til dit projekt.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition: Printing and Related Support Activities
Employees: 1
Subsidiaries: 0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
View Profile

Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company

2867 East Allegheny Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19134, US
Last Update: 2025-12-17
Between 750 and 799
http://sed.com

Diverse Clients. Diverse Needs. One Dynamic Solution. As Philadelphia’s leading commercial printing company, Smith-Edwards-Dunlap (SED) has built a reputation of achieving high levels of client satisfaction through exceptional service and high quality commercial printing production. What sets us apart from other commercial printing companies is our ability to integrate century-old values and traditions with continually evolving modern technology and exceptional customer service. In fact, we are so obsessed with meeting and exceeding expectations that we tailor our commercial printing process to each job and then execute with the efficiency that clients can rely on. Smith-Edwards-Dunlap’s tradition is a promise to exceed client expectation through loyalty and dedication. The commitment to printing technology, combined with relentless care in execution, is how Smith-Edwards-Dunlap satisfies that promise.

NAICS: 323
NAICS Definition:
Employees: 33
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/zealand-packaging.jpeg
Zealand Packaging
—
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/smith-edwards-dunlap-company.jpeg
Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company
—
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
Zealand Packaging
100%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified
Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company
0%
Compliance Rate
0/4 Standards Verified

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Zealand Packaging in 2025.

Incidents vs Printing Services Industry Average (This Year)

No incidents recorded for Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company in 2025.

Incident History — Zealand Packaging (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Zealand Packaging cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Incident History — Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company (X = Date, Y = Severity)

Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries

Notable Incidents

Last 3 Security & Risk Events by Company

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/zealand-packaging.jpeg
Zealand Packaging
Incidents

No Incident

https://images.rankiteo.com/companyimages/smith-edwards-dunlap-company.jpeg
Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company
Incidents

No Incident

FAQ

Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company demonstrates a stronger AI Cybersecurity Score compared to Zealand Packaging company, reflecting its advanced cybersecurity posture governance and monitoring frameworks.

Historically, Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company has disclosed a higher number of cyber incidents compared to Zealand Packaging company.

In the current year, Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company and Zealand Packaging company have not reported any cyber incidents.

Neither Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company nor Zealand Packaging company has reported experiencing a ransomware attack publicly.

Neither Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company nor Zealand Packaging company has reported experiencing a data breach publicly.

Neither Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company nor Zealand Packaging company has reported experiencing targeted cyberattacks publicly.

Neither Zealand Packaging company nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company has reported experiencing or disclosing vulnerabilities publicly.

Neither Zealand Packaging nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither company holds any compliance certifications.

Neither Zealand Packaging company nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company has publicly disclosed detailed information about the number of their subsidiaries.

Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company company employs more people globally than Zealand Packaging company, reflecting its scale as a Printing Services.

Neither Zealand Packaging nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company holds SOC 2 Type 1 certification.

Neither Zealand Packaging nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

Neither Zealand Packaging nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company holds ISO 27001 certification.

Neither Zealand Packaging nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company holds PCI DSS certification.

Neither Zealand Packaging nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company holds HIPAA certification.

Neither Zealand Packaging nor Smith-Edwards-Dunlap Company 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