Following up on Should we sponsor OWASP again?, I'd like to request SEI to renew their corporate sponsorship of OWASP.

From OWASP.org:

The Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) is a 501c3 not-for-profit worldwide charitable organization focused on improving the security of application software. Our mission is to make application security visible, so that people and organizations can make informed decisions about true application security risks.

(Note that OWASP is a 501c3 not-for-profit.... )

To recap from last year's sponsorship request:

With all the good that SEI is doing, and sponsoring several open source projects to further their goal of making the Internet smarter, I think OWASP would be a great partner to that goal.

And from @RoryAlsop's answer on the other re-sponsor post:

They are an independent, not for profit organisation which aims to provide free tools for all web developers to help secure their code, applications and environments and this benefits us all.

They are high profile, and the OWASP Top Ten has been accepted by most of the Fortune 500 as the de facto minimum requirements for securing their externally facing web sites. In addition ESAPI, the Enterprise Security API makes it easier for coders to write lower risk applications by providing a security control library.

Good recipient of sponsorship, I say - wide audience, deserving cause, high profile, will benefit SE's members directly.

Specifically, I am talking about being a corporate sponsor for the global OWASP organization.

As part of the sponsorship, 40% of the funds can be allocated to specific chapters or projects, as was discussed last year at Which OWASP Project should SEI support?.

I would most prefer sponsorship of the Israel conference again (if it is possible to arrange this in time, though this is doubtful), as I am on the IL chapter board and responsible for the conference:

Specifically, this conference (unlike most of the other AppSec conferences) is completely free to attend, and is totally covered by sponsorships. We are expecting several hundred to attend.

In addition, the consensus last year was to allocate an additional 20% to ESAPI, as this project is a software package used by a very large number of developers worldwide.

If you agree with the sponsorship, but think the allocation would be better for a different project, please add that here.

  • Could we split some of the conference funding into the UK chapter? We've got quite a few high-rep members here from the UK.
    – Polynomial
    Commented Aug 24, 2012 at 8:53
  • @Polynomial what are their financials like?
    – AviD Mod
    Commented Aug 24, 2012 at 9:16
  • Erm, I have no idea to be honest. I just thought it'd be a nice idea. Not even sure how I'd find out.
    – Polynomial
    Commented Aug 24, 2012 at 9:18
  • Sure it could be nice, especially with several members there, but the real question for me is how much they need the funding? and in relation to other chapters? And, to a lesser extent, what other output does the chapter have, besides meetings?
    – AviD Mod
    Commented Aug 24, 2012 at 9:44
  • For example, the IL chapter (aside from my own personal interest) has a big yearly conference - which is always free to attend; they produce quite a lot of original research; a lot of work goes into projects from there, both local (e.g. translations) and core projects. However, the IL chapter is extremely cash poor. Sponsorships just barely cover conference costs, and there is no treasury left over. Of course there may be other chapters in similar situations - but that's what I'm saying :)
    – AviD Mod
    Commented Aug 24, 2012 at 9:46
  • Well I do Scotland and TBH we don't have a lot of funds mainly 'cause I'm useless at that side of things :) That said we don't have any major requirements for funds on the horizon either. There's a swathe of new-ish chapters in England that might be in need, I could ask if that'd be useful.. Commented Aug 24, 2012 at 10:57
  • I talk to the guys who run the brummie edition on Twitter sometimes. I'll poke them to see what they're up to.
    – Polynomial
    Commented Aug 24, 2012 at 10:58
  • I've looked at a bit at ESAPI, and I'm less than impressed. I couldn't find clear documentation, the main website is confusing, and at least the .net variant is unmaintained and the code is somewhere between weird and bad. Commented Sep 1, 2012 at 19:49

3 Answers 3


Vote for the Chapter we're sponsoring: UK Chapter


Vote for the Project we're sponsoring: ESAPI


Vote for the Chapter we're sponsoring: Israel Chapter

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .