[Owasp-leaders] OWASP Branding & Twitter thread from Dinis

Dinis Cruz dinis.cruz at owasp.org
Fri Aug 14 15:11:16 UTC 2015


Yap, what we need is common sense with how rules are applied

My view is that in orgs like owasp, policies and rules are just
'guidelines' for the ones that don't abuse or dont move away from AppSec.
The job of owasp's Ops team (IE its employees) is to make owasp leaders
more productive, not to give them work (ie make them jump through hoops to
get anything done)

We need to empower our leaders and make them feel loved, after all they are
the ones adding value to OWASP
On 14 Aug 2015 15:42, "Richard Greenberg" <richard.greenberg at owasp.org>
wrote:

> I agree with both of you. We certainly want to change rules that make no
> sense, but we don't want an oligarchy deciding all of these things. As
> leaders, it is on us to work within our structure to facilitate change.
> Just the way it is. deal with it. if you don't have the time, i respect
> that. By bringing it up here in the forum, you have done a lot. now others
> must pick up the baton.
>
> At our local chapter meetings, we see no problem with vendors who present
> educational talks that enrich and enhance our members' knowledge to be able
> to have their logos on the slides. We are not so sensitive. We clearly
> understand the way the world works. Sure, it would be nice if every speaker
> presented based on an altruistic desire without any thought of their
> company, and that every company would cover travel and time costs for their
> employee to speak without any thought of potential clients, but REALLY!!??
> As long as there is NO marketing at all in the presentation, let them
> display their damn logo! You'll get a lot more speakers, folks!
>
> Richard Greenberg, CISSP
> President, OWASP Los Angeles, www.owaspla.org <http://www.appsecusa.org/>
> ISSA Fellow
> VP, ISSA Los Angeles, www.issa-la.org <http://www.appsecusa.org/>
> LinkedIn:  http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardagreenberg
> (424) 261-8111
>
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 7:23 AM, Noreen Whysel <noreen.whysel at owasp.org>
> wrote:
>
>> This is what you said: "The sole purpose of OWASP events is to pay
>> operations but operations is not the mission of owasp right?"
>>
>> Regarding the rules. I operate within rules defined by the community. If
>> the community wants to change the rules, discussions like this are the way
>> to start.
>>
>> Noreen Whysel
>> Community Manager
>> OWASP Foundation
>>
>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 10:09 AM, johanna curiel curiel <
>> johanna.curiel at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>> Yes but I should not be forced to do things. Thats is where the line
>> between volunteering and 'work' is passed. Thats the point of this
>> discussion. A volunteers works gets rejected because of some rules that
>> have been not properly applied.
>> Riot games is not an appsec vendor!
>>
>> >My point was that it is an incorrect statement that all event revenue
>> goes to staff/operations.
>>
>> I have never said that. I said that events are organised to help pay
>> operations. Because otherwise Noreen, OWASP could do not pay your salary.
>> Are you willing to volunteer your time instead if OWASP had no money to pay
>> you?
>>
>> And BTW this is my last email. I have no time for this useless
>> discussions. It seems that you must go and fill in forms
>>
>> And that won't correct the mistake was done with David Rook.
>>
>> My message is: correct that mistake and evaluate the rules your self. You
>> don't need volunteers writing proposals or mailing list to do that. I
>> assume the staff is smart enough to not confuse a vendor like Riot Games
>> (which is in the gaming industry) with and Appsec vendor.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Azeddine Islam Mennouchi <
>> azeddine.mennouchi at owasp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Johanna,
>>> what you are saying is almost like Saying : "I donate money to a
>>> childcare but I will take a chair as a souvenir" (if everyone took
>>> something from the childcare the donation will have no value)
>>> if you don't have the time to volunteer just don't it is as simple as
>>> this
>>> let's not redefine the Volunteering concept here please
>>>
>>> Regards Islam,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Eoin Keary <eoin.keary at owasp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm behind you 100%
>>>> I received a negative email after delivering a free class to 80 people
>>>> and raising €3k for Owasp. All time and slides donated by me.
>>>> I posted the slides to an alternative site after.
>>>>
>>>> Eoin Keary
>>>> OWASP Volunteer
>>>> @eoinkeary
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 14 Aug 2015, at 13:14, johanna curiel curiel <
>>>> johanna.curiel at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I just think the whole logo and branding rule are hypocritical rules.
>>>>
>>>> When OWASP does a conference, logos from sponsors can be placed loud
>>>> and clear on the APPSEC page. Is that vendor neutral?
>>>>
>>>> When a speaker that gets no money and no coverage for his/her traveling
>>>> cost does the same on their slides then 'we are non-profit' and cannot be
>>>> done.,,
>>>>
>>>>  The sole purpose of OWASP events is to pay operations but operations
>>>> is not the mission of owasp right?
>>>>
>>>> Keep the core mission insight. I don't care which logo is displaying or
>>>> not on those slides as long as the content is valuable and the speaker is
>>>> worth of listening.
>>>>
>>>> If OWASP wants no logos and has all these rules then I think , pay the
>>>> speaker & his time to set that presentation in that format.
>>>>
>>>> Sometimes volunteers are treated like we should be happy we work for
>>>> nothing.
>>>>
>>>> We should be happy to have Dave Rook present for free and not the other
>>>> way around and explain that awesome experience implementing security where
>>>> he is working. Love those slides they rock & they are cool.A lot of time
>>>> when into making those slides and we should respect that.
>>>>
>>>> Volunteers have bills to pay and mouths too feed too.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Johanna
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Tom Brennan <tomb at proactiverisk.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> AppSecUSA should have sessions for collaboration of people on top
>>>>> issues of projects, chapters and events.  in addition to fantastic
>>>>> presentations as always.  Blog posts like this should be reviewed as they
>>>>> have merit and I support covering a honorarium for speakers as they are the
>>>>> product.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.alba13.com/2014/10/free-its-just-costing-too-much.html?m=1
>>>>>
>>>>> As well as top community issues that are bubbling up not always
>>>>> addressed at the monthly board meetings.
>>>>>
>>>>> I submitted my recommendations for  several sessions for the community
>>>>> evolution aspect of the global event including these and by who... I hope
>>>>> some of these suggestions are incorporated and resonate with leaders to
>>>>> attend.
>>>>>
>>>>>  *#1 OWASP State of the Union (30)*
>>>>> * Paul CEO / Board of Directors
>>>>> - State of the Union address and kickoff - Annual report and YTD update
>>>>> - Mission, Metrics and Finances
>>>>> - kick off the event hand off to conference staffer (Laura) and
>>>>> conference chair (Michael)
>>>>>
>>>>> *AppSecUSA leader workshops *- join us for a important updates,
>>>>> debate and collaboration for FUTURE and current leadership of OWASP
>>>>> members. If you want to unlock valuable information don't miss these (3)
>>>>> sessions
>>>>>
>>>>> ** record these sessions video and get them online for the world to
>>>>> see and listen to just like any other session.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *How to start or grow a OWASP Chapter in your region (45 mins)*
>>>>> * Paul, Noreen, Kelly
>>>>> - metrics that matter
>>>>> - requirements defined 15 mins
>>>>> - tips form out chapter leaders (panel) 30 mins
>>>>> -- growing attendance
>>>>> -- vendor relationships/sponsors
>>>>> -- regional events
>>>>> -- how OWASP employees help
>>>>> -- money in/out other
>>>>> -- secrets to success
>>>>> -- WASPY awards
>>>>>
>>>>> *2016 services and resources for OWASP chapter and project leaders
>>>>> (45mins)*
>>>>> * Paul, Noreen, Claudia
>>>>> -- metrics that matter
>>>>> -- annual report review
>>>>> -- general membership
>>>>> -- projects
>>>>> -- chapters
>>>>> --WASPY awards
>>>>> -- what can we do better discussion
>>>>>
>>>>> *2016 + Summits Conferences Events (45 mins)*
>>>>> ** Laura, Noreen, Claudia, Kelly
>>>>> -- metrics that matter
>>>>> -- motivation why do it?
>>>>> -- the new definition(s), money splits etc.
>>>>> -- expectations and current policy
>>>>> -- resources (budgets, templates, process) review of successful and
>>>>> failure events
>>>>> -- WASPY awards
>>>>>
>>>>> The organization is an interesting position for evolution.  With
>>>>> professional discussion and debate we can set the agenda moving forward
>>>>> with swift adjustments where needed by rough consensus.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Brennan
>>>>> 9732020122
>>>>>
>>>>> Need to book a meeting for a new or existing project?
>>>>> http://www.proactiverisk.com/book-meeting/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 14, 2015, at 6:36 AM, Dinis Cruz <dinis.cruz at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry if I gave the impression that this is urgent, it is not
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm just trying to raise a concern that was raised to me
>>>>> On 14 Aug 2015 10:36, "Jim Manico" <jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dinis,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Two points.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Mr Rook is on vacation. I do not agree with your sense of urgency.
>>>>>> We hired a full time staff, lets please use them first as opposed to heated
>>>>>> conversations over Twitter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2) Dinis, I am just one of several board members. Please just email
>>>>>> the board list if you think this is a board level issue (as opposed to just
>>>>>> calling me out over Twitter, I am just one board member).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So Dinis, I asked you politely to first talk to staff about this, and
>>>>>> if you did not find that satisfactory, then to email the board list so the
>>>>>> full board can weigh in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And I suggested these things to minimize stress and get more
>>>>>> leadership to look at this - as opposed to having a Twitter argument over
>>>>>> this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dinis, I am trying to take the adult and calm path here. Please join
>>>>>> me in that pursuit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Aloha,
>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/13/15 10:04 PM, Dinis Cruz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CCing owasp leaders list in order to get 'feedback' from the community
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And Jim come on, owasp is not a Fortune 100 company with high levels
>>>>>> of processes and bureaucracy, the problem is pretty obvious on the
>>>>>> https://twitter.com/davidrook/status/631699570603462656 thread (and
>>>>>> a couple other similar threads)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a case of common sense.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The focus of owasp needs to be on application security (for example
>>>>>> sharing knowledge), not in blindly following rules
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes we need to have rules in place to prevent abuse (in this case
>>>>>> vendor pitches), but if those rules start to affect high value owasp
>>>>>> contributors, then there is something wrong with the rules
>>>>>> On 13 Aug 2015 21:11, "Jim Manico" < <jim.manico at owasp.org>
>>>>>> jim.manico at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > So what happens when the content is not from a 'vendor'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Our guidelines do not differentiate that right now. So what Paul is
>>>>>>> doing is following the current policy that was created by input from a
>>>>>>> large number of people from our community.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dinis, if you think this needs to be changed then I believe your
>>>>>>> next step is to petition the board to change policy. Even better, before
>>>>>>> talking to the board, consider taking this conversation to the governance
>>>>>>> list and get feedback from those members of our community.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Aloha,
>>>>>>> Jim
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 8/13/15 9:42 AM, Dinis Cruz wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So what happens when the content is not from a 'vendor'?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which is David's case
>>>>>>> On 13 Aug 2015 20:26, "Paul Ritchie" <paul.ritchie at owasp.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Dinis:    I wanted to follow up on your email from yesterday as
>>>>>>>> well as your posting of a "case" or customer service ticket #  06774.
>>>>>>>> Long answer.....explaining the OWASP position and our actions, and we have
>>>>>>>> communicated this a couple times to the community, but obviously need to do
>>>>>>>> more......
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Big Issue* is our effort from the Foundation to "remind and
>>>>>>>> encourage" Chapter leaders to follow the Branding Guidelines, Code of
>>>>>>>> Ethics and Speaker Agreement as defined in the Chapter Leaders Handbook.
>>>>>>>>  The more support we can get from leaders like you and Jim and BoD, then
>>>>>>>> the less 'pushback' we will see from individuals who are uncomfortable
>>>>>>>> being reminded of the policy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1.  We noticed the adherence to the policy was getting a little
>>>>>>>> weak, based on several examples where policy wasn't followed.  Examples
>>>>>>>> included leaders and past BoD members too.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2.  Once we pointed out the policy, several of the key leaders,
>>>>>>>> like Eoin & now David were "surprised" that we were serious, and actually
>>>>>>>> gave us some push back.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3.  Bottom line, I understand the pushback, but we really "must"
>>>>>>>> ask OWASP Leaders to follow the policy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 4.  As a Charitable, nonprofit organization,* we have an
>>>>>>>> obligation to follow our Code of Conduct* concerning vendor
>>>>>>>> neutrality and non-endorsement of commercial products or services.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Our Code of Conduct policies are* well documented and were created
>>>>>>>> by our community*, to provide clarity as we grow globally.  They
>>>>>>>> apply to many areas including Trade organizations, Government bodies,
>>>>>>>> Standards groups and Certifying Bodies.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.owasp.org/index.php/OWASP_Codes_of_Conduct
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 5.  Also, For speakers at events AND at Chapter Meetings, the
>>>>>>>> Speakers agreement does apply, and it is noted in the Chapters Leaders
>>>>>>>> Handbook.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Speakers Agreement
>>>>>>>> *CONTENT - Speakers are encouraged to include their contact
>>>>>>>> information when introducing themselves, but may NOT include their logo on
>>>>>>>> any visual and handout materials. Speakers are to avoid any appearance of
>>>>>>>> commercialism in their session and presentations are to be of a technical
>>>>>>>> or solutions emphasis. Further, I understand that the program tracks of the
>>>>>>>> conference/event/chapter are an educational event, not a sales or marketing
>>>>>>>> platform. I agree that my presentation(s) will be an objective review of
>>>>>>>> the topic on which I am presenting, and will not contain any content that
>>>>>>>> is a sales or promotional pitch for any specific product(s) or
>>>>>>>> company(ies). My materials will also be reflective of the current status of
>>>>>>>> the topic(s) I am addressing.*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 6.  So, Net, net.   We are reaching out to a number of chapters
>>>>>>>> who have posted presentations to the OWASP wiki that appear to violate our
>>>>>>>> branding rules. All presentations given at chapter meetings or at
>>>>>>>> conferences when representing OWASP, and those posted to wiki pages must be
>>>>>>>> vendor neutral. This includes the content of the presentation as well as
>>>>>>>> the graphics used in the presentation layout.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any non-OWASP branded material, such as a speaker's corporate
>>>>>>>> logo, must be removed from the presentation. Exceptions may exist
>>>>>>>> such as when the context of a slide calls for a logo as an illustration.
>>>>>>>> And, we am happy to review anything that might be questionable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, @Jim and @Dinis - Is there something we need to do to reach out
>>>>>>>> directly to any individuals like David Rook?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best Regards, Paul Ritchie
>>>>>>>> OWASP Executive Director
>>>>>>>> paul.ritchie at owasp.org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jim Manico
>>>>>>> Global Board Member
>>>>>>> OWASP Foundationhttps://www.owasp.org
>>>>>>> Join me at AppSecUSA 2015!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jim Manico
>>>>>> Global Board Member
>>>>>> OWASP Foundationhttps://www.owasp.org
>>>>>> Join me at AppSecUSA 2015!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> WARNING: E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or
>>>>> error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
>>>>> arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does
>>>>> not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this
>>>>> message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. No employee
>>>>> or agent is authorized to conclude any binding agreement on behalf of
>>>>> ProactiveRISK with another party by email.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>>>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>>>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Islam Azeddine Mennouchi
>>> Consultant at ITS
>>> http://www.infotoolssolutions.dz/
>>> OWASP ALGERIA Chapter Leader
>>> phone n°: +213658227651
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
>> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OWASP-Leaders mailing list
> OWASP-Leaders at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/owasp-leaders
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20150814/aa67cbb5/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list