<div dir="ltr"><div>My personal opinion is that this is fine. The OWASP Top 10 is a published standard and Acunetix is claiming that they are capable of scanning for the issues identified in the OWASP Top 10 standard. I don't think that we should be responsible for policing whether or not they actually do what they say they do. With that line being pretty blurry to begin with, I doubt Acunetix is the only company advertising in this manner. And as long as they're not claiming to be "OWASP Certified", or the like, I think this is not worth pursuing.<br><br></div>~josh<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Jim Manico <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org" target="_blank">email@example.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
When we do a google search for "OWASP" I see that Acunetix is
advertising that they are scanning for the OWASP Top Ten. The ad
<a href="http://www.acunetix.com/vulnerability-scanner/scan-website-owasp-top-10-risks/" target="_blank">http://www.acunetix.com/vulnerability-scanner/scan-website-owasp-top-10-risks/</a><br>
I think this ad violates the following brand usage guidelines:
<a href="https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Marketing/Resources#The_Brand_Usage_Rules" target="_blank">https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Marketing/Resources#The_Brand_Usage_Rules</a><br>
5) The OWASP Brand must not be used in a manner that suggests that
The OWASP Foundation supports, advocates, or recommends any
particular product or technology.
7) The OWASP Brand must not be used in a manner that suggests that a
product or technology can enable compliance with any OWASP Materials
other than an OWASP Published Standard.
8) The OWASP Brand must not be used in any materials that could
mislead readers by narrowly interpreting a broad application
security category. For example, a vendor product that can find or
protect against forced browsing must not claim that they address all
of the access control category.
I would like to file this with our compliance officer, but I think
he is over-burdened right now. Do you think this is a clear
violation and if so, should we approach them in a gentle way with
suggestions to correct this?<br>
Owasp-board mailing list<br>
<a href="https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board" target="_blank">https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-board</a><br>