All vendors

Vendor lineage

Compugraf (now CG One)

A computer graphics company that became a security company, and kept the name for forty years.

The name is the story. Compugraf was registered in São Paulo in April 1982, and it did what it said: computação gráfica, computer graphics. Somewhere in the 1990s it moved into information security, and then stayed there for three decades under a name that had stopped describing it.

That is a more common pattern in this industry than the tidy histories suggest, and this timeline has several instances of it. Companies rarely rename themselves when their business changes, because the name is the thing customers already trust - so the trading name becomes a fossil of what the company used to do. Anyone meeting Compugraf as a security integrator in 2010 had no particular reason to know it had once sold graphics systems.

The security business settled into the shape most Brazilian integrators of its generation took: network and information security for large domestic customers across industry, financial services and energy, sold and supported locally rather than through a multinational's channel. The company describes itself as one hundred per cent Brazilian, with over 150 staff and more than five hundred client companies served across two decades.

**In 2024 it finally renamed, to CG One** - which keeps the initials of the graphics business while abandoning the word. Forty-two years is a long time to carry a name you have outgrown, and shortening it to two letters is the usual compromise between continuity and accuracy.

**A note on what this entry does not say.** Sourcing for Brazilian integrators of this size is thin compared with the international companies elsewhere on this timeline. The founding date here comes from the commercial register, which is reliable for exactly that. The account of the pivot from graphics to security is the company's own, repeated by business directories, and should be read as such. No revenue figure is given, because the only one available came from a contact-data aggregator rather than from a filing or a credible report - and a number with no provenance is worse than no number.