[Owasp-leaders] Proposal: Remove all commercial/non-OWASP logos from OWASP.org

Jim Manico jim.manico at owasp.org
Thu Apr 4 11:11:10 UTC 2013

I hear you, Dinis. I'm mostly with you here.

Supporting sponsors is critical to OWASP's success. I say we move the logos
of our very gracious sponsors to a dedicated sponsorship page like:

I suggest we mimic this behavior and let our sponsorship page be the only
place where logos exist. Then chapters, projects and the wiki can link back
to that page (governed by clear rules of play). Then we only have to manage
that one page only.

Apache is solid when it comes to vendor neutrality. They are a good model
for us.

This is a •really• important conversation in my opinion. Thanks for jumping
in here.

Jim Manico
(808) 652-3805

On Apr 4, 2013, at 6:01 PM, Dinis Cruz <dinis.cruz at owasp.org> wrote:

*(Resending this email, since for some reason I got a bounce from the email
I sent to owasp-leaders a couple days ago).*
*(I also blogged this at
and there are already a couple good comments in there from Michael and

Following the recent threads about the commercialization of OWASP, I think
the time as come for a simple move, that will be a little bit painful, but
will clear the water and send a nice big message of what OWASP stands for.

*Remove all commercial/non-owasp-projects logos from OWASP.org*

This move has a log of advantages:

   - it is generic so it doesn't single out anybody
   - it can be done since there are no 'real' contractual obligations for
   OWASP to put company's XYZ logo on the OWASP site
      - note that OWASP can change the content of any content hosted on
      owasp.org , as long as the changed content is released in an
      compatible license :)
      - in fact anybody can start the http://owasp-without-logos.org site
      with all content from owasp.org, expect the 3rd party logos
   - it will push the cases where sponsor-logos are expected to exist, to
   be placed in separate/dedicated 3rd party websites (like what happens with
   AppSec conferences)
      - and if there ARE execptions, they should be treated as one-of
      exceptions (and be fully documented)
   - it will stop the current *'F1/NASCAR logo parade'* that is the OWASP
   main page, and some of its projects
   - it will stop the nasty and non-productive *"hey that
   company shouldn't have their logo in that project"* threads
   - it will send a strong message that OWASP is about sharing information
   and all information/tools/projects that are 'donated' to owasp are supposed
   to be shared in a no-strings/logos attached mode
   - it will clarify that *the OWASP logo, name, tools and content CAN be
   used in commercial situations, as long as it is done outside of OWASP.org
   - it shows a sign of maturity for OWASP, where OWASP doesn't need
   (anymore) to sell a bit of its soul in exchange for good content and tools
   - it shows that OWASP's value to the corporate sponsors, is NOT a logo
   on owasp.org, but the amazing value provided by the multiple OWASP
   activities, events and projects.
   - it shows that OWASP can learn from others, and in this case, follow
   (as Jim recommended) the Apache foundation example (see
   http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/responsibility.html )

There are a couple disadvantages:

   - Some OWASP leaders and supporting companies will be annoyed and fell
   that *'OWASP changed the value-added they would get by contributing to
   - Some OWASP corporate sponsors might even be so angry that they don't
   renew their anual membership
   - Some OWASP leaders might be so annoyed that they stop contributing at
   all to OWASP
   - This is one of those issues that has the potential to generate a
   gazilion of emails, with lots of opinions and no decisions in the end. Btw,
   the faster 'a' decision is made the better (Yes or No).

I believe that OWASP today (April 2013) is in the perfect situation to make
this move. There is enough money to sustain any financial loss (which I
don't think will happen) and the OWASP projects are still in a state where
a drop of a couple OWASP leaders wouldn't have a dramatic effect (which
again i don't think will happen)

So what do you say, fellow OWASP friends, should we make this jump?

*My vote is YES, lets get rid of the commercial logos in OWASP and start a
new generation of OWASP content and tools*

Dinis Cruz

OWASP-Leaders mailing list
OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20130404/c72c178e/attachment.html>

More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list