[Owasp-board] Klockwork covers OWASP Top Ten -- Riiight

Dave Wichers dave.wichers at owasp.org
Mon Jan 29 15:13:15 UTC 2007


I think we should. Should we say in the brand usage rules that if you say
something like we look for the OWASP Top 10, or cover the Top 10 or
whatever, you MUST include a reference to a publicly accessible page that
'explains' how well you 'think' you cover each element of the Top 10? This
would encourage vendors to be open about their claims, or not abuse the
brand. I think the openness would be good for the business. If they make
claims that are false, their customers will call them on it.

 

-Dave

 

  _____  

From: owasp-board-bounces at lists.owasp.org
[mailto:owasp-board-bounces at lists.owasp.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Williams
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 9:44 AM
To: owasp-board at lists.owasp.org
Subject: [Owasp-board] Klockwork covers OWASP Top Ten -- Riiight

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid=CC5BE970CB9B428B8D5A60
E2079EA6AE
<http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid=CC5BE970CB9B428B8D5A6
0E2079EA6AE&siteid=mktw&dist=nbk> &siteid=mktw&dist=nbk

 

Do you think we should include a paragraph in the new Top Ten that basically
summarizes our brand usage rules?

 

--Jeff

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-board/attachments/20070129/a4c97421/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Owasp-board mailing list